One of the biggest things bemoaned by the MRA movement and indeed a lot of conservative talking heads is bemoaning the loss of “traditional masculinity”. We bemoan the loss of the man’s man.
Or at least the idealised version. Deep Voiced, Broad Shouldered, A Jack of All Trades and maybe a master of one too. Strong, cultured enough to identify a good foie gras but worldly enough to like a burger and probably bring down the animal to make one. A red blooded carnivore who can still hold a kitten in a calloused hand. Probably from chopping all that wood.
It is a romantic view of the past.
This man is dead. Well dead in the eyes of these traditionalists. Oh his moustaches and flannel still make up our fashion but only ironically. No. Today. Bear Wrestling is an entirely different pastime.
How did society reach the point where, a lawsuit filed this week alleged, a man working at the desk of Planet Fitness on Bay Shore, Long Island was too afraid of repercussions to enter the ladies’ room to administer CPR to a dying woman? “He said he didn’t know what to do and that he wasn’t allowed to go into the ladies’ bathroom,” a witness said in an affidavit.
Amusing considering there are no repercussions for walking into a woman’s room in emergencies but here is the thing.
Most men don’t know what to do in that situation either. Not everyone knows CPR, not everyone can do it properly even if they know it and honestly?
You may know CPR, but doing CPR is different from knowing it after all. But this is the crux of the argument.
The real man would have charged in, ripped off the door and administered the kiss of life.
She would have fallen in love and married him in a year. What I see is a man who panicked when placed out of his depth in a situation he had no idea how to deal with. To the above sort of person? This man may as well trade in his “man card”.
A poll conducted on behalf of a British children’s charity reports that many men refuse to join because they fear being labeled pedophiles. A British Airways passenger sued the airline because he was forced to change seats in accordance with the carrier’s policy that no man be allowed to sit next to a child, even one accompanied by his parents. (Don’t worry, there’s a perfectly great middle seat for you in the last row, guys. Next time, take the bus.)
Wait what? I fly a lot and there is no such policy. I have sat next to children travelling solo and indeed with their parents and no one ever asked me to change seats.
Last time I checked, I was a bloke. Maybe the rules are new. Nope I checked. it was a policy and the reason for the rule was due to fears of paedophiles flying and molesting children on flights. This was pre-emptive rules, to simply protect BA from future law suits. The reality is paedophiles are
1. Rather rare
2. Not going to molest someone on a plane
3. And chances are they are unlikely to be sat next to children on a plane. It’s a hell of a coincidence to trip all three of these.
Okay, do you know why the men sued the airlines? Not just BA but Virgin Australia too?
Because of the way the airline HANDLED the rule. They didn’t use the seating arrangement on the boarding passes to separate men from minors. They didn’t change seats with any style or panache or quietly. They did so in a way that made passengers think the men were paedophiles.
“Would you mind sitting next to these two kids, this man isn’t allowed to sit near children”.
“Would you mind swapping seats? We do apologise but the airline has a policy where minors are seated next to female passengers. We should have done this properly and we are sorry for the inconvenience”.
One of these is a faceless organisation and a suit making a bureaucratic rule that needs to be adhered to by the public face of the company. One of them is telling people that you aren’t allowed near children.
And if that’s a “back of the bus” comparison to Rosa Parks, then it is in poor taste.
In Illinois, 28-year-old Fitzroy Barnaby was convicted of “unlawful restraint of a minor,” a sex crime, and placed on a sex-offender registry after he grabbed the arm of an 14-year-old girl to lecture her on not dashing into the street in front of a moving car, as she had just done. On a blog called Parent Dish, a reader said he stopped coaching girls soccer after an 8-year-old player told him, “I don’t have to listen to you. I can get you in trouble just by telling people you touched me.” In England, a man passing by 2-year-old Abigail Rae, who later drowned, declined to help guide her to safety because he feared being labeled a pervert.
I checked these out mostly it is right wing rags that the story is carried on and being used to bemoan a world gone mad.
These same right wing rags demand insane rules post paedophile scandals and lynching to solve the “problem” too. In short? They are angry when men are labelled as paedophiles, then angry when men are allowed into situations where they molest children creating a catch 22 situation where they are just angry no matter what you do.
Everywhere you look, men are AWOL. Have they declined to show up or have they been kicked out?
Both, says Helen Smith in a new book citing these alarming examples and others. “Men on Strike” notes that men have disappeared from campus (where nearly 60% of undergrads are female), from the workplace (the percentage of men employed hit an all-time low last fall, down from 87% to 70% in the past 65 years) and from the family (the American birth rate is just above an all-time low, and more than half of women under 30 giving birth are unmarried). Tired of being labeled defective women, wary of the financial traps of marriage and fatherhood, hammered by the disappearance of construction and manufacturing jobs, disgusted by the presumption that their sexuality is a scary disease, men are shrugging and turning away.
I thought men were all capable and smart. Surely you can compete with women?
Basically? Men are not working as much as before, and if you do not know why then perhaps you haven’t noticed the economical downturn causing loss of jobs.
In fact your argument is “men aren’t working as much because women have taken all their jobs”. Which is a demand to discriminate against women so that men have jobs.
And a demand that a real man works in construction and manufacturing. The real joke is that a huge amount of manufacturing is done by women. Manufacturing job losses hurt women too.
The real joke here is men have solid non-University careers while women do not. Look at traditional jobs men do? Many of them require trade schools. Women however tend to require specialist training for theirs.
Simple comparison? Plumbing is taught at trade school, Secretary work at University.
The rules of the game have tilted against men in every field this side of coal mining (black lung being one of the few male privileges the ladies are happy to cede). Family courts hold men financially liable even for children conceived by women who falsely claimed to be using birth control, while at colleges the presumption of innocence has been withdrawn from men accused of sexual misbehavior.
Yeah, the old MRA canard of women doing all the soft jobs.
The fact remains that huge numbers of women work in Mining in most other countries. In the west it was simply not a traditional job.
The biggest joke is why there are no demands for more men in nursing. It is always about why there are no female miners but never about more male nurses. Not to mention absolutely hilarious claims about the commonality of faux rape accusations.
In a year they had 35 false rape accusations. Vs. 5650 real ones. Not even 1% of total accusations are false. And this is a common fear among MRA.
“Uncle Tims” — male feminist lapdogs eager to curry favor with their female and feminized masters — are everywhere, Smith notes. Yet one man quoted in the book reports dropping out of college after being accused of “maladjustment” and subjected to horrified looks when he said he might buy a gun someday. A video-gaming blogger notes of fellow enthusiasts, “It’s bizarre how some of them are in their 20s, have graduated from good schools, and have simply zero interest in women.”
Really? The oppression of blokes is as bad as slavery in the Antebellum South?
And it is rather puzzling about how many of us have degrees and interest in women and are nice people. Have you ever considered the issue is less about women and more about wishing women did everything you wished for without any demands of their own?
Needless to say, there is not a renowned and powerful National Organization for Men to lobby against these grim and worsening realities, and if there were it would be treated by a joke by those who didn’t dedicate themselves to eliminating or feminizing it the way they destroyed so many traditional all-male associations.
There are male issues.
The problem is the entire goddamn dialogue is dominated by idiots like yourself. People who simply didn’t get how masculinity has changed and instead wish to go back to a period where we worried about women driving because the vibrations may make them lurid and wanton.
Helen Smith was once a feminist, when that stood for equality and fairness. “Now it means female privilege,” she writes, “and I believe discrimination against men is every bad as discrimination against women.”
Yes. Which is why we saw MRA try and denigrate women in India and Afghanistan last year from “A Voice for Men” and their demand for greater rights was effectively mocked by people who have most of them.
She concludes by urging men to speak up more, to get their point of view across in public forums, to stand up for their rights in courts and on campus. But as a psychologist she has intimate knowledge of fractured relationships from people she has counseled, and she advises women that they also have much to gain by keeping men from fading out of the picture. It’s a myth that men won’t talk about their feelings, she says: If they’re silent, it’s because they think they won’t get a fair hearing. Listening without judgment, focusing on his positive aspects, and resisting the temptation to complain about him (especially to third parties) can be useful in keeping a man around.
Except the people speaking should never have really opened their mouths.
” I’ve had a good life as a male, but there are millions out there who would gladly get raped in exchange for knowing what it’s like to have society care about you by default.”
If this is the sort of man who represents my gender is it any wonder that our dialogue of male issues is frankly treated as idiotic. This is a man denigrating a woman’s PTSD triggering issue in order to say that he wishes he had that sort of attention.
At no point has he realised that people oppose his demands for equality require a reversal of progress.
Polls show that women’s happiness has steadily declined over the last five decades, even as women enjoy unprecedented success in educational and career terms.
But if men catch a cold, society sneezes. We tell “men they are worthless perverts who reek of male privilege while simultaneously castrating them should they act in a manly manner, and now women are upset that men are becoming more feminized?” Smith writes. “You reap what you sow.”
Have you ever considered that there needs to be a new imagination of what it means to be a man rather than wistfully imagining the old steak eating man who keeps his wife at home.
Have you considered that men can do different things and our dialogue needs to change to redefine masculinity so that we can embrace a more equal society. I mean… no one is going to suggest you don’t learn to be handy and learn to fish and play sport or do CPR. What we are suggesting is treating women equally and dealing with our issues in a productive manner rather than claiming that all of them are due to women getting equality.