Are Men in Danger?
- Thread starter GracieRuth
- Start date
Jim, I never said anything whatsoever about your opinion being "bad". Not even once.
The article Gracie posted and asked about in the OP clearly discussed overuse of videogames. You quite clearly stated you play 5 hours of videogames a day. Therefore, discussing the role of videogames and internet addiction in this issue seems relevant to the topic. I never got on any soapbox, nor did I shout. Apparently, however, I hit a sore point with you since you said (counterfactually) that I did "shout from a soapbox" and found me "condescending".
You said that the "problem" with men today not performing economically, has more to do with women's rights and things like AA and the like. I said well, it probably has a lot to do with videogame addiction and other things.
See?
So basically, you said those things are the root cause of the "decline" of men, and by implication, if they would just go away, men would be better off. I disagreed. The men around me aren't even declining. You found me condescending and proceeded to imply the men in my life would do anything to make me happy, due, apparently, to my "shouting" and being on a "soapbox". Which I didn't do, and you don't even know me or the men around me. (The men around me -- "my men" are certainly not declining, and they succeed quite nicely in a diverse and multi-gendered group of clients, co-workers and schoolmates. So therefore, it is hard for me to accept that societal changes are the main problem.)
And you even said I attempted to label you! Label you? I was worried about you! You labeled yourself when you said you spent all that time playing videogames. I was actually concerned you might have a problem. Guess not, carry on. I've got to go now.
The article Gracie posted and asked about in the OP clearly discussed overuse of videogames. You quite clearly stated you play 5 hours of videogames a day. Therefore, discussing the role of videogames and internet addiction in this issue seems relevant to the topic. I never got on any soapbox, nor did I shout. Apparently, however, I hit a sore point with you since you said (counterfactually) that I did "shout from a soapbox" and found me "condescending".
You said that the "problem" with men today not performing economically, has more to do with women's rights and things like AA and the like. I said well, it probably has a lot to do with videogame addiction and other things.
See?
So basically, you said those things are the root cause of the "decline" of men, and by implication, if they would just go away, men would be better off. I disagreed. The men around me aren't even declining. You found me condescending and proceeded to imply the men in my life would do anything to make me happy, due, apparently, to my "shouting" and being on a "soapbox". Which I didn't do, and you don't even know me or the men around me. (The men around me -- "my men" are certainly not declining, and they succeed quite nicely in a diverse and multi-gendered group of clients, co-workers and schoolmates. So therefore, it is hard for me to accept that societal changes are the main problem.)
And you even said I attempted to label you! Label you? I was worried about you! You labeled yourself when you said you spent all that time playing videogames. I was actually concerned you might have a problem. Guess not, carry on. I've got to go now.
Please do, I don't know you therefore your opinions with regards to what I do are not welcome.
The topic is: Are Men in Danger - in General. I recommend in future you stick to it rather than singling out other members of the forum. Getting your fingers rapped because you try to grab and touch where you do not have permission is painful, therefore consider it a lesson learnt.
I tend to agree overall with what is said in the article.
I would think being thought of as immature by Women of your age group would be devastating to a guy.
I know it would be to me!
Should be motivation enough to put down the video games, get off your ass, grow a pair, and do something with your life!
I would think being thought of as immature by Women of your age group would be devastating to a guy.
I know it would be to me!
Should be motivation enough to put down the video games, get off your ass, grow a pair, and do something with your life!
It's interesting that so many perceive feminists as anti-male, when the goal of feminism is equality, not one gender being superior than the other.
No no, the definition of a man was set a decade or so back.
A man must be swift as a coursing river
Possess the strength of a great typhoon
Contain the strength of a raging fire
Be as mysterious as the dark side of the moon.
Other qualities include being as tranquil as a forest, but like fire within.
The main problem though is...society has become rather defeatist. Why bother doing something, it won't make a difference, and the alternatives are much more pleasing. The world is going to heck, so might as well enjoy it while you can. Our public figures constantly let us down, so we grumble but accept that there's no better solution we can come up with.
William J. Bennett, people. 
As for why are men not getting married as often now
As for why are men not getting married as often now
Also, I'm female, but I don't really agree with the article from the OP at all. For one, I don't feel all that enamored with the institution of marriage, secondly, religion isn't for everyone, and doesn't equate success as a person in the slightest. Lastly, what was discussed there were simply more sexist gender roles, this time against men. It's just the same as women, pressure to be one thing or another.
True, women are a subordinated group in many regions, including the United States, but there's no reason why that means that men don't also experience limitations and oppression because of their dominant status - people just generally don't see the similarities between the experiences of the two, and focus on what women have experienced. I agree that there should be more light shed on what women go through - the fact that 1 in 4 women will endure sexual assault/rape in their lifetime is testament to this, but articles like this also shed light onto the pressures and gender roles that we place on men.
No matter your gender (or if you prefer to be gender neutral, whatever), you shouldn't be expected to adhere to one role or another, or be subjected to societal pressure to, say, marry. I don't care who you are, you should be free to be your own person - not to feel like you're "in danger" because you haven't met someone else's shoddy standards.
Thus, if I were ever to call myself a feminist, it would be bearing in mind this definition, the usual definition, actually:
True, women are a subordinated group in many regions, including the United States, but there's no reason why that means that men don't also experience limitations and oppression because of their dominant status - people just generally don't see the similarities between the experiences of the two, and focus on what women have experienced. I agree that there should be more light shed on what women go through - the fact that 1 in 4 women will endure sexual assault/rape in their lifetime is testament to this, but articles like this also shed light onto the pressures and gender roles that we place on men.
No matter your gender (or if you prefer to be gender neutral, whatever), you shouldn't be expected to adhere to one role or another, or be subjected to societal pressure to, say, marry. I don't care who you are, you should be free to be your own person - not to feel like you're "in danger" because you haven't met someone else's shoddy standards.
Thus, if I were ever to call myself a feminist, it would be bearing in mind this definition, the usual definition, actually:
Last edited:
I strongly agree with [MENTION=4598]hush[/MENTION], but here is my contribution...
[video=youtube;JjzHZDPrYKg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjzHZDPrYKg&feature=related[/video]
Abandon conditioned roles. Clear away the smoke, break the mirrors.
Hello, self-realization! Still neglected? What a pity, you could've shone.
[video=youtube;JjzHZDPrYKg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjzHZDPrYKg&feature=related[/video]
Abandon conditioned roles. Clear away the smoke, break the mirrors.
Hello, self-realization! Still neglected? What a pity, you could've shone.
Last edited:
Men aren't in danger because a 'man' is a person like the head of Goldman & Sachs. In my opinion the problem is that my generation is full of boys in men's bodies. These 'new age men' that began to be accepted in the eighties are wusses. I think the same is true for the opposite sex. Women are becoming very rare and girls becoming idealized. Take Miley Cyrus for example, what kind of example is that for young girls? It really makes me sad.
Ahhh no, no way. You aren't looking at this from the mans prospective. Just as many many can't understand women the feminists movement ignores men at best and stomps on them at worst. Granted the men's movoment no is better. But until we all realize that both are fighting for one side we won't make any forward progress.
There is a reason I'm a humanist and not a gender specified group!.
Did you by any chance read my second post, in which I clarified my position? I called for the liberation of BOTH genders from gender roles and focused on how both experience sexism. I try not to look at from either a man's, or a woman's perspective - more so like you, from a humanist perspective. That's why I included in my second post some of the different motivations of so-called "feminists" who do indeed focus on males. One can't neglect one for the other; everyone's been affected by the expectations of what a certain gender should or should not be and there's a distinct interrelationship between the experiences of men and women who've had the image of what they should be shoved down their throats their entire lives - and many are currently living out the consequences of this.
I'd mostly agree but take a step back for a second. Everyone acts on their own self interest. Which, in turn, drives the laws of supply and demand.
I think this article is sexist/ad hominem and also uninformative because it fails to take a couple very important things into consideration.
1. As a group, men still earn more than women and still dominate the high paying professions in business, the sciences, etc.
2. A large part of the statistics sighted by the article can be explained by the fact that we are in a recession that has heavily affected or occurred in conjunction with the more male-dominated areas of the economy going down, especially finance and construction.
3. Given economic reality, 'manning up' or becoming more 'mature' as the article frames it is much easier said than done. It makes it more difficult to get married (what is the correlation between women's perception of a man's 'maturity' and his annual earnings?), to care about religion, and of course to get a job.
This article smacks of a "good ol' days" mentality and doesn't take current circumstances into consideration. Reading this, I see the article basically equating "man" with wage earner or bread-winner for the Godly family. That is what a man does, apparently.
Ugh. Will they be able to find jobs as well, or will they have to take their instructions while standing in line at the dole office? The author references Plato's Republic, and do I need to go into any detail as to why that is horribly ironic? That book is synonymous with idealistic utopianism.
1. As a group, men still earn more than women and still dominate the high paying professions in business, the sciences, etc.
2. A large part of the statistics sighted by the article can be explained by the fact that we are in a recession that has heavily affected or occurred in conjunction with the more male-dominated areas of the economy going down, especially finance and construction.
3. Given economic reality, 'manning up' or becoming more 'mature' as the article frames it is much easier said than done. It makes it more difficult to get married (what is the correlation between women's perception of a man's 'maturity' and his annual earnings?), to care about religion, and of course to get a job.
This article smacks of a "good ol' days" mentality and doesn't take current circumstances into consideration. Reading this, I see the article basically equating "man" with wage earner or bread-winner for the Godly family. That is what a man does, apparently.
Ugh. Will they be able to find jobs as well, or will they have to take their instructions while standing in line at the dole office? The author references Plato's Republic, and do I need to go into any detail as to why that is horribly ironic? That book is synonymous with idealistic utopianism.
Ok, I actually just read the article and the end made me laugh my ass off...
Really? You're going to reference the founding fathers beliefs on this one. Lets take it one conservative step further and talk about the declaration of independence. This is why people don't like conservative people very much: they say stupid shit.
Really? You're going to reference the founding fathers beliefs on this one. Lets take it one conservative step further and talk about the declaration of independence. This is why people don't like conservative people very much: they say stupid shit.
You're going to reference X - I disagree, therefore X is an irrelevant and stupid reference.
You're going to reference X - I agree, therefore X overrides all other references ever and is 100% relevant.
It's not the most effective line of argument either for or against,
I'll give you a break since you're not from the US. There are a group of people who constantly quote either the declaration of independence or what our founding fathers would have thought about something and try to make it relevant to a situation. It is rarely relevant.
