As long as we add the caveat "white men", because it is largely them this pertains to
Argument is simply the delivery of the value. You were the one that suggested that the greater induction of women resulted in a financial detriment for men. But that argument just hinged on college participation, and gender statistics are redundant to the result. So why make the point for the gender divide? I replied saying the redundancy of the statistic, so you insisted that there was a design. So I replied simply that there's no reason to simply assume that it really needs to be anything more than what it is. Misogynists proclaim the state of the world is perpetual and insist on natural order. I don't believe in normal. I'm just saying random is a thing.That is the reasoning behind every anti-feminist speech ever and has never been an admissable argument before.
Absolutely possible. Still there are basically no programs to get more men into university or something like that and there is no public outcry whatsoever.It could simply be toxic masculinity. Studying is seen as intellectual and unmanly by many. Other factors may have masked this in the past, but as some barriers fall for women, this is exposed as a previously-masked issue for men.
God, the shit I got in school for being smart.
Education would be an area where boys are not in a good place, at least in Germany. This is a pretty old statistic but I don´t have access to any newer data right now. In 2004 10.5% of boys of a given age cohort left school without graduation, on the other hand only 6.3% of girls left without graduating. 24.4% of boys got the necessary qualification to go to university, on the other hand 32.3% of girls attained said qualification. And on average they have better grades too. The same trend continues during university. It is aknowledged by the public that this is the case, but nobody wants to do anything about it.
There has to be some kind of systematic cause for the difference in success
Absolutely possible. Still there are basically no programs to get more men into university or something like that and there is no public outcry whatsoever.
I think that more men should take a look at this twitter thread to have an insight on what's going on. Click on the timestamp to open the whole post.
There's also a sentiment I've seen growing more and more among women in social media that, same as they grew tired of being the de-facto "free" caregiver, they're also growing more and more tired lately of being men's free therapist. The thing is, this is a problem that straight men have brought upon themselves, and it's their job to fix it. Women and other men that are not subject as rigidly to toxic masculinity rules (such as visible queer men like myself) can help, but we will do it to the best of our ability and will. We cannot do all the heavy lifting for you to reap the benefits, you know, as we already have enough work not getting ourselves assaulted and/or killed on the regular by... you know: straight men.
Just to reiterate my point since I think we are not talking about the same thing.Argument is simply the delivery of the value. You were the one that suggested that the greater induction of women resulted in a financial detriment for men. But that argument just hinged on college participation, and gender statistics are redundant to the result. So why make the point for the gender divide? I replied saying the redundancy of the statistic, so you insisted that there was a design. So I replied simply that there's no reason to simply assume that it really needs to be anything more than what it is. Misogynists proclaim the state of the world is perpetual and insist on natural order. I don't believe in normal. I'm just saying random is a thing.
I am blessed with having two girls. I am sure I will have headaches later, but there is much more open mindedness of them doing "boy stuff."Not exactly in this thread, but some posts ago we have a quote of a dem politician almost saying it was women's fault for the van guy being sexually unsatisfied. Let's get back to the point of all this being straight men work: I have a nephew in 1st grade, I can try my best to provide him with toys, literature or media that don't enforce traditional gender roles. I can be a model for him to realise that it's OK for men to do "girly stuff". But all that work goes to waste as long as my brother-in-law (his father) and all the family on his side keep on shoving toxic masculinity and heavily gendered media and toys down my nephew's throat 24/7. He's only 6 and now refuses to see "girl shows" that he had no problem watching on TV a mere year ago FOR FUCKS SAKE.
There will be. This is an issue with a trailing effect. The effect isn't being felt as much yet.
When men generally control government and business, wouldn't you expect the men to actually address the issue? MRAs poison the water by bringing things like this up and then blame feminism/focus on women as if addressing problems in society can only be done one at a time.
What's your solution? Who can you support that's advocating for change that isn't trying to tear down women with the other hand?
I don´t have a solution. Simply aknowledging that there are areas where men are actually disadvantaged and in need of help in the discourse on equality would go a long way towards making the discussion more healthy and public action more likely.
Just to reiterate my point since I think we are not talking about the same thing.
I pointed to education as an area where boys/men are "left behind" (I don´t like that expression) and provided official figures to illustrate that point. Someone then argued that educational success is irrelevant since men still earn more during their life time. I criticised that argument as I don´t think it is ok for boys/men to have fewer possibilities in education just because the average male supposedly still earns more during their life time. I am not arguing that greater induction of women results in a financial detriment for men. I argue that a society should strive to have equal participation of the genders throughout the educational system. Also I do not argue that there is a design behind the lower success of boys/men in education. I argue that there must be systematic or societal reasons for this difference. I am not saying it is intended for boys/men to have less success in school.
Among boys that like learning/reading as much as the girls, we cannot find significant differences in abilities or marks, as these boys perform about as well as their female peers.
Actually had a look at reports on this, such as this one here, which my fellow German poster may have read:
https://www.bmfsfj.de/blob/94248/74...e/maedchen-und-jungen-in-deutschland-data.pdf
It's actually really relevant to the thread in some ways, more than I thought it'd be.
Paraphrased conclusion:
Guess I was on to something when I pointed out that male students are less likely to take roles that go along with "learning a lot", but when they do, they do just fine.
On top of this, the same report points out something that I alluded to in my post, but couldn't really put my finger down on. It turns out that the same schools where girls "perform better" when compared to their male peers also significantly *limit* girls, especially in scientific classes. Teachers tend to ascribe "gender-typical" attributes to students, meaning that in coed schools, boys get better grades for the same work in scientific classes than girls do. Girls consequently do much better in girl-only schools when it comes to scientific classes.
Which leads to the interesting conclusion that, despite better marks in a vacuum, for literally every relevant topic, coed schools actually disadvantage girls. Boys get worse marks, but still end up advantaged in the real world.
Getting higher marks in German and art isn't particularly helpful in the job market.
The report also lists a number of reasons why boys may perform worse, ranging from the above mentioned "gender-typical" traits ascribed to students and the overall "boy"-behavior that I mentioned in my earlier post to something VERY relevant to this topic:
Boys that perform worse are MUCH less likely to ask for help or accept the authority of teachers, ESPECIALLY female teachers. Instead, the very same masculine ideals lead them to instead isolate themselves and act out against their (female) peers.
Turns out that Germangerbil is flat out wrong on boys being "disadvantaged" by the school situation when it comes to success in life, yet he still stumbled on something pretty important by accident.
So yeah, if we need a public outcry, that'd be one that a)addresses how this is massively disadvantaging and sidelining girls, while at the same time addressing the stereotypes that work against studyious men. After all, those stereotypes sure are damaging there, in more ways than one, and absolutely unhelpful for their well being (or behavior towards women).
We sure keep coming back to those shitty stereotypes how "a man should be" hurting literally everyone :/
If I'm thinking of the right post, I didn't interpret it as shifting the responsibility onto prostitutes. Just allowing them to do business. That seems like a conscious decision rather than a "responsibility".
Boys that perform worse are MUCH less likely to ask for help or accept the authority of teachers, ESPECIALLY female teachers. Instead, the very same masculine ideals lead them to instead isolate themselves and act out against their (female) peers.
Turns out that Germangerbil is flat out wrong on boys being "disadvantaged" by the school situation when it comes to success in life, yet he still stumbled on something pretty important by accident.
So yeah, if we need a public outcry, that'd be one that a)addresses how this is massively disadvantaging and sidelining girls, while at the same time addressing the stereotypes that work against studyious men. After all, those stereotypes sure are damaging there, in more ways than one, and absolutely unhelpful for their well being (or behavior towards women).
We sure keep coming back to those shitty stereotypes how "a man should be" hurting literally everyone :/
If I'm thinking of the right post, I didn't interpret it as shifting the responsibility onto prostitutes. Just allowing them to do business. That seems like a conscious decision rather than a "responsibility".
I have a 24-year-old son who lives at home. He's had health-related issues his entire life, which is why he's still finishing his informatics degree. He's had short (very) term girlfriends (and none recently), but by and large he spends the majority of his time in his room gaming and hanging on Twitch. He's a level-headed, liberal kid, but this 'incel' stuff freaked me out the last couple of days, so I asked him how much he bumps up against it in his online life. He had to look up what incel even was after I asked. So there IS hope. This stuff isn't *so* pervasive that we're going to have entire armies out there, but, yeah, the lone actors are causing enough trouble on their own.
I don´t have a solution. Simply aknowledging that there are areas where men are actually disadvantaged and in need of help in the discourse on equality would go a long way towards making the discussion more healthy and public action more likely.
I don't think you will find any feminist who says patriarchy doesn't hurt men to some extent.
You should check Jackson Katz Ted talk.
He touches topics of why feminism is good for men in the long run.
They basically have no positive role models and are in a shit position in society. Doesn't excuse a toxic mentality but it's easy to see why frustrated young males get sucked up in it.
There's no empowerment for them except like-minded outcasts online.
All this information is pointless unless you also factor in what their income is during their life time. Men still are still going to be making more money then women. Women have had to up their education game just to even compete. These boys will be fine or... omg we might actually have equity between the sexes, the horror.
I am blessed with having two girls. I am sure I will have headaches later, but there is much more open mindedness of them doing "boy stuff."
I don't know if I have the testosterone to raise a "manly man."
No doubt that would happen.I feel the same way about my daughter. I buy her toy trucks and no one gives a shit. I could enroll her in judo and nobody would blink. If I had a boy and he wanted a doll or to take a dance class? Endless shit from his peers and probably some parents.
It still shocks me how willing people are to just gobble up garbage arguments and labels about "genetics". Just absolutely insane. Ultimately, these people are living too-sheltered of lives to realize the countless ways in which their core beliefs just don't hold water, and then listen to shitty PUA advice that just gets even more demoralizing when "easy fixes" don't work.
Finding hobbies and interests that have something resembling a decent gender balance and require leaving the house would honestly help fix the issues for like 80% of the "incel" crowd.
Most of the people in that video need grooming advice and people that will actually hold them accountable, and then start a long, long road of normalizing their relationships and interaction with the opposite sex. Some of them are actually okay looking, like better looking than a bunch of married people that I know.
Okay, ladies and gentlemen, where do we start with this post? The projection? The self loathing? The warped expectations?Did we even watch the same video? There was not a single person in it who wasn't complete 100% genetic trash (like me). Not one of them would be there if they were actually attractive to girls like this:
Their introvert life style and non-NT personalities are the RESULT of how they got treated by their peers/society because of their looks. You're blaming the symptom and completely ignoring the root cause. The only thing being confident and outgoing will do is get them beat down even further.
I fully agree. I am just advocating for trying to do something for men in the short run too.
Do you think someone who works his ass off and only gets minimum wage pays attention to the pay-gap of the middle classes or Company bosses? There is no pay-gap for the poor
Shouldn't we be more empathic and open to people who think otherwise than the societal norm? I don't mean to open the door to alt-right people, rather to accept and include people who are suspectable to the honey-pot of alt-right propaganda after they got ridiculed for years.
Throwing the "opportunity" ax at the faces of straight white man doesn't solve this problem, it even accelerates it.
Yes, they have the opportunity to have a better life, but this opportunity is long gone with late20's early 30's, you are just throwing salt in the wound and drive some of the left/centrist leaning into the alt-right.
Do you think someone who works his ass off and only gets minimum wage pays attention to the pay-gap of the middle classes or Company bosses? There is no pay-gap for the poor, they all get the same shitty minimum wage per hour. We are talking about 25 to 40% of the working population depending on the individual country.
Do you think someone who is not great in social interaction, or dating, or just doesn't care about sexual relationships, is happy that he is labeled a loner/loser/weirdo, just because he has no active relationship?
Isn't it kind of comedic, that a big part of the liberal/left/feminist society, which this forum, and we as the users, are a part of, still defines the worth of a man by the ability or the desire to get into a relationship with a woman.
Shouldn't we be more empathic and open to people who think otherwise than the societal norm? I don't mean to open the door to alt-right people, rather to accept and include people who are suspectable to the honey-pot of alt-right propaganda after they got ridiculed for years.
I watched that video a couple of weeks ago and a couple of those guys would look great if they dressed and groomed themselves better. I've seen worse looking guys with girlfriends all of the time. It's not looks, it's attitude. These guys think arrogance is confidence. They don't want to have a loving relationship, they want a conquest.Did we even watch the same video? There was not a single person in it who wasn't complete 100% genetic trash (like me). Not one of them would be there if they were actually attractive to girls like this:
Their introvert life style and non-NT personalities are the RESULT of how they got treated by their peers/society because of their looks. You're blaming the symptom and completely ignoring the root cause. The only thing being confident and outgoing will do is get them beat down even further.
Did we even watch the same video? There was not a single person in it who wasn't complete 100% genetic trash (like me).
Not one of them would be there if they were actually attractive to girls like this:
Did we even watch the same video? There was not a single person in it who wasn't complete 100% genetic trash (like me). Not one of them would be there if they were actually attractive to girls like this:
Their introvert life style and non-NT personalities are the RESULT of how they got treated by their peers/society because of their looks. You're blaming the symptom and completely ignoring the root cause. The only thing being confident and outgoing will do is get them beat down even further.
~We're all beautiful elves on the inside~If women only got with "dudebros" wouldn't we all be like beautiful elves or something?
All of this is a product of modern society and the digital age. Isolation breeds bad thoughts and feeling in your head. Isolation won't help you get a job, get a girl or improve your living standard.
It's easy to become isolated these days
Movies,games,books, entertainment is easily accessed. Food can be delivered to you. You keep doing this and you will end up alone eventually with no social skills towards the opposite sex, towards an interviewer etc.
Schools need to start having mandatory social skills courses from k through 12.
PS: This 'I must be a dudebro' stuff is absolute bullshit. Some women are actually turned off by the super jacked and cocky jock thing. Jesus.
Edit: I came off kind of harsh but that post was so misguided that it was borderline demeaning.
"Must be" is obviously an exageration but you yourself mention you had to work out to get a relationship, amongst other things. In a recent study posted in this forum 100% of the participating women prefered stronger bodies. 100%! If you want to be helpful, encourage people to work out, no need to feel good lies that are simply not true for the whole group. For every woman that's legit grossed out by muscles you can be sure a lot more will pay more attention to you.
And the people talking about no trash genes (as far as artractiveness goes) obviously don't have below average skin, teeth, height, testosterone (hard to build muscle) and personality ALL at once, heh.
"Must be" is obviously an exageration but you yourself mention you had to work out to get a relationship, amongst other things. In a recent study posted in this forum 100% of the participating women prefered stronger bodies. 100%! If you want to be helpful, encourage people to work out, no need to feel good lies that are simply not true for the whole group. For every woman that's legit grossed out by muscles you can be sure a lot more will pay more attention to you.
And the people talking about no trash genes (as far as artractiveness goes) obviously don't have below average skin, teeth, height, testosterone (hard to build muscle) and personality ALL at once, heh.
You don't have to get jacked, what's being implied is that you need to put some work in your appearance in order to be appealing, be it doing regular exercise, wearing clothes that fit your body type and age (instead of relying on baggy pants and oversized shirts) and getting groomed on the regular. Want some advice? If you have Netflix take a look at Queer Eye. You don't have to become a "Chad". You have to present yourself in a way that shows that you CARE.
You can fix all that. Especially the personality part which is what will drive away potential partners at the very beginning. But hey, it's always easier to blame other people for being shallow than just putting *some* work yourself.