User Tag List

First 4567 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 67

  1. #51
    Level 8 Propaganda Bot SpankyMcFly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    461 so/sx
    Posts
    2,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Male disposability was an idea way before any wave of feminism existed, and it was not needed way before now. This response, I feel, is largely unrelated to the statement of mine that it quotes.
    I didn't imply, that Male Disposability has anything to do with Feminism. I've mentioned this before in the thread. However it does interact with Feminism. Please see OP

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    POST # 53 ...and women in general or feminists in particular don't much enter into this issue.
    I attempted to describe how feminists as a % of the population has historically been low as has their effect on child rearing until "recently". My point being that women have quite a bit to do with how values/roles are taught to children. I agree that men are a part of this as well. I am disagreeing with the your statement that women's part is effectively nill, except where it perpetuates the will of the Patriarchy.

    I agree with the thrust of what you are saying. Men have something to do with the continuation of Male Disposability. That is the point of creating this thread. Please see OP

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    I have a distaste for identity politics, but as it is, intersectionality actually goes a long way to take the stuff of identity politics and turn it back into something flexible enough for the real world. There are accepted ways to categorize people in a society, and privileges bestowed unevenly to different identified categories. A person can be combinations of the more and less privileged categories, and each one will have its respective effect on a person's life.

    Ideally I'd like these categories to exist. In reality, I know they do and have a serious impact, and trying to pretend they don't is essentially just neglecting the problem. It doesn't matter how silly you think any categories are in philosophical terms, perceived power is real power. If those who have the power in society (by numbers, by rank, by any means) believe in black and white or masculine and feminine, they will make it a reality through the way they treat people.
    I didn't reply to the first part of your response as it gets into Patriarchy theory
    "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents... Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new Dark Age. " - H.P. Lovecraft

  2. #52
    Level 8 Propaganda Bot SpankyMcFly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    461 so/sx
    Posts
    2,396

    Default

    Bah, double post Monster again.
    "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents... Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new Dark Age. " - H.P. Lovecraft

  3. #53
    78% me Eruca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    INxx
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    941

    Default

    Spanky since both of us want to continue debating the MRA/feminist/humanist shebang would it be appropriate to ask a moderator to separate off those areas of our discussion to another thread while we continue the more male-disposability related stuff here? I'll assume for now you agree and that that can be done by simply replying to those parts of your text that relate more directly to that topic.
    This thread was subsequently split with, by mistake I assume, this last post of mine on male-d posted in the gender politics thread. I'm re-posting it here, as it is, mostly, discussing the causes of the male-d phenomena from an alternative perspective to the OPs. (alternative causes) If spanky would prefer this thread be dedicated to discussion of the OP's and the author of the video's perspectives of this topic then I will remove this post.


    Quote Originally Posted by SpankyMcFly View Post
    I think that Aimee Greene was wrongfully discriminated against and I hope those responsible are made to pay. I would like to see more women in protector roles myself, i.e. cops, firemen, security guards, soldier etc. As long as they are qualified for the position more power to em. My only concern is the standards by which they are deemed qualified becoming watered down by gender politics.
    Quote Originally Posted by SpankyMcFly View Post
    I did not create this thread to justify all MRAs or even some of them but you keep asking me to do so and other instances of "men" being discriminatory, i.e. the firemen case. This seems like a typical tactic. Patriarchy even made an appearance

    You seem to be misunderstanding my point and why I posted those links about how sexism in the firefighting profession is common. I did not do so to make a point about how bad women have it or how awful men are being! My point was, considering how common this sexism is, how unpleasant it must be to be surrounded by it, and how firm our gender roles are in terms of, for example, firefighter = man, nurse = woman, surely this is our best explanation for a lack of female firefighters and subsequently female workers in other dangerous/traditionally male professions. Hell, you expressed a concern yourself that females may not be able to handle the firefighter role when you stated you hoped standards were not relaxed. Is a lack of physical ability, or, even more so, a perceived lack of physical ability not another likely explanation why women aren't in these dangerous physical roles? Is male-dissposability, then, a primary factor in the high death and injury statistics amongst men in comparison to women? I think I've provided sufficient evidence, at this time, for at least the problem of sexist/toxic work environments and it follows from this that women would not apply to, are less likely to remain in, less likely to recommend to other women, occupation in these professions. Do you agree with this? Would you consider male-dissposability the primary factor in these statistics?

    I'll briefly summarize my current position to the male-D idea. You are likely aware of it anyway but I'll state it so we avoid confusion. The way I see it, and this is I believe mostly in line with the general feminist view, is that the symptoms to which you (?) would attribute to male-D are a result of left other chivalric ideas. Now I must be very careful here not to mention the P word otherwise I know I'll turn you off entirely! The chivalric ideal, the ideal of the gentleman, the manly man's ideal, martial masculinity, all these ideals that to some extent define themselves by the, partly, to be sure, fine ideals of honour, toughness, self-sacrifice the protector and guardian position etc etc. Who to protect? Who to sacrifice oneself for? Naturally, the innocent and the weak. Women and children. Children, of course, are innocent and weak in themselves. Women, of course, were encouraged to be weak and innocent by the p... the p... their...parents. They played their roles for some significant amount of time. Feminism came along. It attempted to disabuse the western world of the notion that women were weak or naturally innocent (re; non-sexual non-violent passive nurturing). They were only partly successful in this aim. The chivalric ideals remain. Women are still, to some smaller extent, thought of worthy of protection and, as such, to be protected. And a man's man, a soldier, the traditionally masculine man, is still, to some extent, expected to fulfill this role. Indeed, he will feel emasculated if he does not. These gender roles are the cause of the male-d phenomena (in my view).
    I hope I'm wrong, but I believe that he is a fraud, and I think despite all of his rhetoric about being a champion of the working class, it will turn out to be hollow -- Bernie Sanders on Trump

  4. #54
    Level 8 Propaganda Bot SpankyMcFly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    461 so/sx
    Posts
    2,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eruca View Post
    You seem to be misunderstanding my point and why I posted those links about how sexism in the firefighting profession is common. I did not do so to make a point about how bad women have it or how awful men are being! My point was, considering how common this sexism is, how unpleasant it must be to be surrounded by it, and how firm our gender roles are in terms of, for example, firefighter = man, nurse = woman, surely this is our best explanation for a lack of female firefighters and subsequently female workers in other dangerous/traditionally male professions. Hell, you expressed a concern yourself that females may not be able to handle the firefighter role when you stated you hoped standards were not relaxed. Is a lack of physical ability, or, even more so, a perceived lack of physical ability not another likely explanation why women aren't in these dangerous physical roles? Is male-dissposability, then, a primary factor in the high death and injury statistics amongst men in comparison to women? I think I've provided sufficient evidence, at this time, for at least the problem of sexist/toxic work environments and it follows from this that women would not apply to, are less likely to remain in, less likely to recommend to other women, occupation in these professions. Do you agree with this? Would you consider male-dissposability the primary factor in these statistics?

    I'll briefly summarize my current position to the male-D idea. You are likely aware of it anyway but I'll state it so we avoid confusion. The way I see it, and this is I believe mostly in line with the general feminist view, is that the symptoms to which you (?) would attribute to male-D are a result of left other chivalric ideas. Now I must be very careful here not to mention the P word otherwise I know I'll turn you off entirely! The chivalric ideal, the ideal of the gentleman, the manly man's ideal, martial masculinity, all these ideals that to some extent define themselves by the, partly, to be sure, fine ideals of honour, toughness, self-sacrifice the protector and guardian position etc etc. Who to protect? Who to sacrifice oneself for? Naturally, the innocent and the weak. Women and children. Children, of course, are innocent and weak in themselves. Women, of course, were encouraged to be weak and innocent by the p... the p... their...parents. They played their roles for some significant amount of time. Feminism came along. It attempted to disabuse the western world of the notion that women were weak or naturally innocent (re; non-sexual non-violent passive nurturing). They were only partly successful in this aim. The chivalric ideals remain. Women are still, to some smaller extent, thought of worthy of protection and, as such, to be protected. And a man's man, a soldier, the traditionally masculine man, is still, to some extent, expected to fulfill this role. Indeed, he will feel emasculated if he does not. These gender roles are the cause of the male-d phenomena (in my view).
    Two things.

    Chivalry was a Christian thing started around the middle ages and had everything to do with religion's view on how people should be.

    Male Disposability goes way back to prehistoric times, before we had language, math, even our first settlements, as a concept and had very much to do with traditional gender roles. We disagree on when/what begat it. You think it's a more modern thing. I think it's older.

    The irony, truly, is that me and you probably agree on what to do about it. It isn't needed any more! Men and women's view on it should/need to change. Men are just as valuable as women are when it comes to these life/death situations.

    If you go to the video @ 11:55 Girl Writes What?! asks the question:

    "What exactly is feminism doing to dismantle this traditional role of the disposable Male?"

    "Feminism's greatest victories have only reinforced in everyone that society still owes women provision, protection, help and support just because they are women. In it's collective dismissal and abandonment of male victims of domestic violence it only reinforces in men that it's pointless for them to ask for help because men's needs are of no relevance and their fear and pain don't mean anything to anyone. Feminism teaches us to put women's need at the forefront of every single issue, political or social whether that issue is domestic violence law, sexual assault law, institutional sexism, social safety nets, education funding, homeless shelters, government funding for shovel ready jobs that didn't stay shovel ready once feminists got wind of them. Everywhere you look, everywhere you look, there are feminists pushing their way to the front of the line, demanding women's "fair share", of all of the goodies, the good stuff, the loot, the booty, the cookies. Even if women don't need it, even if women don't deserve it and even if somebody else, needs it and deserves it more. And they get it, because we give it to them. Feminism has done nothing but exploit this dynamic of the expectation on men to put everyone before themselves, especially women, women's safety and support, women's well being and women's emotional needs, always come first."
    "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents... Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new Dark Age. " - H.P. Lovecraft

  5. #55
    78% me Eruca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    INxx
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SpankyMcFly View Post
    Male Disposability goes way back to prehistoric times, before we had language, math, even our first settlements, as a concept and had very much to do with traditional gender roles. We disagree on when/what begat it. You think it's a more modern thing. I think it's older.

    The irony, truly, is that me and you probably agree on what to do about it. It isn't needed any more! Men and women's view on it should/need to change. Men are just as valuable as women are when it comes to these life/death situations.
    Well actually we agree on that historical element. I more chose chivalry as a uncontested starting point for this phenomena. I entirely agree it goes back way further as you said.

    Quote Originally Posted by SpankyMcFly View Post
    If you go to the video @ 11:55 Girl Writes What?! asks the question:

    "What exactly is feminism doing to dismantle this traditional role of the disposable Male?"

    "Feminism's greatest victories have only reinforced in everyone that society still owes women provision, protection, help and support just because they are women. In it's collective dismissal and abandonment of male victims of domestic violence it only reinforces in men that it's pointless for them to ask for help because men's needs are of no relevance and their fear and pain don't mean anything to anyone. Feminism teaches us to put women's need at the forefront of every single issue, political or social whether that issue is domestic violence law, sexual assault law, institutional sexism, social safety nets, education funding, homeless shelters, government funding for shovel ready jobs that didn't stay shovel ready once feminists got wind of them. Everywhere you look, everywhere you look, there are feminists pushing their way to the front of the line, demanding women's "fair share", of all of the goodies, the good stuff, the loot, the booty, the cookies. Even if women don't need it, even if women don't deserve it and even if somebody else, needs it and deserves it more. And they get it, because we give it to them. Feminism has done nothing but exploit this dynamic of the expectation on men to put everyone before themselves, especially women, women's safety and support, women's well being and women's emotional needs, always come first."
    This is going into the feminism vs MRAs debate which we are deliberately trying to avoid! Obviously, in response to this I would provide some instances in which cultural changes and alternative (feminist) opinions would contradict the idea of males as disposable or females as uniquely valuable. But I think we can leave that to the gender politics thread, which I will eventually post in I assure you. For now, let's find out if you and I "[would] probably agree on what to do about it." Let's focus on the dangerous professions as they seem the most direct and clear instance of males expected to occupy, and indeed occupying, dangerous positions. I implied earlier that in order to rectify this situation we would need to:
    A. Reorganize gender roles (for men particularly) so they are not obligated to be protectors, the strong, the rock, the provider etc. That they are entitled to be vulnerable and protected by other people; men or women.
    B. Tackle sexist attitudes such as a man in a caring role or nonphysical role such a nurse, office worker, or stay at home dad as emasculating. Conversely, tackle gender roles stating that women are weak, can't hack dangerous jobs or dont belong there.
    C. Tackle sexism and old-boy clubs that push out females from male roles. I'm afraid males are accomplice to their own demise, at least, in this area.

    But I'm assuming (in some manner?) you would also include:
    D. Encourage understanding of males as as valuable as females. Alternatively, encourage the idea that males are more valuable than currently seen, or that females are less valuable than currently seen.

    This is obviously a really rough sketch but let's see how we compare.
    I hope I'm wrong, but I believe that he is a fraud, and I think despite all of his rhetoric about being a champion of the working class, it will turn out to be hollow -- Bernie Sanders on Trump

  6. #56
    Level 8 Propaganda Bot SpankyMcFly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    461 so/sx
    Posts
    2,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eruca View Post
    This is going into the feminism vs MRAs debate which we are deliberately trying to avoid! Obviously, in response to this I would provide some instances in which cultural changes and alternative (feminist) opinions would contradict the idea of males as disposable or females as uniquely valuable. But I think we can leave that to the gender politics thread, which I will eventually post in I assure you. For now, let's find out if you and I "[would] probably agree on what to do about it." Let's focus on the dangerous professions as they seem the most direct and clear instance of males expected to occupy, and indeed occupying, dangerous positions. I implied earlier that in order to rectify this situation we would need to:

    A. Reorganize gender roles (for men particularly) so they are not obligated to be protectors, the strong, the rock, the provider etc. That they are entitled to be vulnerable and protected by other people; men or women.
    If a woman wants to be a protector I'm all for that, like I said earlier, more women in these roles is a good thing. That said I think that until gender roles change more you are not going to see much of this. Even then, due to physiological reasons, some roles will have very small %'s of women due to the demands of the position.

    Women can/are already perceived as strong and the rock, imo. Just look at historic female heads of state as an example. Could they perceived as stronger more rock like? Sure, I have no issue with that at all. Another point I'd add to the strong & rock, there are many cultural examples of; “Men control the world, but women control the men.” ~ Sherry Argov. Wherein the man is the traditional resource provider but the woman calls the shots. Yes dear, whatever you want dear, etc.

    By providers I will assume you mean "main" providers. Dual working partnerships is pretty much the norm nowadays in the U.S. What I'd like to see is women being the main and ONLY provider, in those instances where a couple decides that a full time caregiver for the family is how they'd like to raise their family. There is a lot of work that needs to be done in this area. This is really a hypergamy thing, imo.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eruca View Post
    B. Tackle sexist attitudes such as a man in a caring role or nonphysical role such a nurse, office worker, or stay at home dad as emasculating. Conversely, tackle gender roles stating that women are weak, can't hack dangerous jobs or dont belong there.
    Men dominated these professions for a long time, historically. With industrialization and the freeing up of time/resources on the home front, i.e. electricty, washing machines, dishwashers and all manner of things, allowed women the time to enter the working sector. OK, first wave helped this along as well. Those types of jobs you list have undergone dramatic feminization. As for care giving, i.e. main/sole family care giver, yeah I'm going to refer to hypergamy again.

    The dangerous jobs thing, yeah sure, women can and do perform some of them, discrimination in this regard should be eliminated. I have to ask the question though, did you know the average logger makes about $15.00 an hour? It's not only the most dangerous job in the U.S., it's back breaking work. I don't see many women wanting to do that kinda work and they don't. You don't need an education or training, per se and all you bring to the table is a willingness to take risk and physical strength/constitution.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eruca View Post
    C. Tackle sexism and old-boy clubs that push out females from male roles. I'm afraid males are accomplice to their own demise, at least, in this area.
    If a female can do the job, she shouldn't have to put up with discrimination. The reverse kind of sexism exists as well, i.e. men in "typical" female occupations being deemed less qualified due to their sex. You don't see this garner many headlines because men don't report as much (gender roles and Male Disposability) and it doesn't make for OMG news.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eruca View Post
    But I'm assuming (in some manner?) you would also include:
    D. Encourage understanding of males as as valuable as females. Alternatively, encourage the idea that males are more valuable than currently seen, or that females are less valuable than currently seen.

    This is obviously a really rough sketch but let's see how we compare.
    The whole valuation thing, well I have to say this, Uteruses. Yeah I know feminists are trying to do away with this mind set but I see that one as a really hard sell. Female physiology is the limiting factor in reproductive success. In the time it takes 1 women to pop out 1 kid. I could potentially impregnate hundreds's . This gives women "intrinsic value". In the world of sexual reproduction a uterus could go for a cool mil, an egg 50K, a penis about 1K (unless it's really big) and an ejaculation 0.10 cents. "We" know this and form our identity and by extension value, by other standards, our roles and what we "do".

    I don't think women need to be made to be seen as less valuable, it would be counterproductive and isn't true. Men can and should be seen as more valuable for sure. The lack of male role models in society has something to do with this. I think a focus on the research that shows just how important a male role model is in a child's life and the ramifications of a lack of one is a good start. However Fems really don't like the concept of mutual need in my experience, and would be just fine and happy with the government fulfilling the role of provider (score 1 for the anti P). The number of single moms (as a % of the population) and the whole "man deserts" that exist in some places underscores this point.

    Allen SM, Hawkins AJ. Maternal gatekeeping: Mothers' beliefs and behaviors that inhibit greater father involvement in family work. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1999;61:199–212.
    "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents... Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new Dark Age. " - H.P. Lovecraft

  7. #57
    Unapologetic being Evolving Transparency's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ESI Fi
    Posts
    3,182

    Default

    I am glad I watched the whole video.

    I don't agree with anything she is saying... really.

    She is bringing down the only thing women have going for them.

    To me, I took that she is saying that it's OK that 75% of the time we CAN treat woman like they are the lesser species, just because of an emergency situation, where the male is expected to die to save the woman.

    That would be like saying its OK to litter 75% of the time but at least 25% of the time we didn't do it.


    It's the other way around lol.


    In an emergency everything comes down to logistics. So the numbers don't lie, when they say its's easier to keep the species going if you save the women and children....

    Everyone becomes an "object" or a number in an emergency. Not just men.

    The emergencies are not going on 75% of the time though.

    So a woman should not be objectified 75% of the time.

    Just to make up for the sacrifice that's made for them 25% of the time.

    We are supposed to be thriving, not just surviving.

    Personally I think each individual needs to get their shit together, figure out what it means for them to be a woman or a man and just live that way. We all don't think the same way. Some guys might not like wearing pink cause they don't like the color...but that shouldn't stop the ones that like it from wearing it(simplistic example.) I think the extremes have gone on for too long.

    Now she did bring up how we are raised. But she is mistaken. I introvert and ignore my feelings more than most men I know. So its not just men that are taught that. And its not just women that are taught to express them.

    Our domestication process is so messed up as a whole. It's not just for the genders. But I have discussed this in other threads so I won't continue about on our upbringing.

    She also gave the impression that some people are more deserving of all the things that feminist s are fighting for.

    I think that is the real problem. Its not only men's self worth that is defined by what they do. It is everyone's. No one person is more deserving than another. We all have self worth issues. Why do you think that young girls run around dressing inappropriately and selling themselves??? Do you think it's cause they believe they are more deserving???? Cause they don't!!!

    And yet again I go back to upbringing. I think I'm done here

    Edit: I didnt get to read the whole thread yet. I just read what gromit wrote. Sorry. I'm not a male either.
    "Once the game is over, the Pawn and the King go back into the same box"

    Freedom isn't free.
    "Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." ~ Orwell
    I'm that person that embodies pretty much everything that you hate. Might as well get used to it.
    Unapologetically bonding in an uninhibited, propelled manner
    10w12

  8. #58
    Senior Member ceecee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    9,745

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    I married my husband because I loved him.
    I married mine because I loved him but his career and resources mattered a great deal too.
    I like to rock n' roll all night and *part* of every day. I usually have errands... I can only rock from like 1-3.

  9. #59
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    The question of whether I'm aware of my disposability is a very loaded one.

  10. #60
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SpankyMcFly View Post
    males form their identity via their utility and what they "do" vs. simply being.
    I call upon men to revolt and give up the values of doing and adopt the values of being.

Similar Threads

  1. What would an INTJ male find physically attractive?
    By Usehername in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 102
    Last Post: 07-11-2015, 10:04 PM
  2. Rarest male type?
    By Economica in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 08-18-2007, 01:25 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO