Women are not the only ones I think forced to live in a doll glass house. I think this was a failure on the part of Henrik Ibsen in his famous play of the 18th century depicting women as deeply oppressed to cultural sexual roles of a authoritarian patriarchy.
It wasn’t just a phenomena that women were expiriencing but rather it’s somthing also that men were expiriencing in the 18th century as well long into our present.
He failed to also see the constant sexual tyranny of cultural expectative roles of men on a wide scale and the oppression or isolation on those males who couldn’t meet them.
Men are infact still tyrannized by many cultural sexual roles that women don’t know very much of or care little to even grasp.
Everytime it’s been tried to be publically discussed it usually get’s ignored or laughed out at in censorship.
Feminism obliterated the notions of expected cultural sexual roles for women that were deemed oppressive but of course in the process of that nobody dared question those of which men have been forced to oblige by for countless millenias unto this current day.
The myth of feminism is that somehow women were far more oppressed than men have ever been. This is just a deceptive myth that has no basis in actual history or reality. Men are highly socially oppressed especially when it concerns some of the sexual cultural roles expected out of them that they are forced to live by.
With the advent of feminism or social political correctness we can see alot of double standards when it concerns sexual inequalities which is one of the reasons why the men’s rights movement is becoming more and more vocal all over the globe.
The rights of women being elevated over men has caused many males to be either displaced socially or actively discriminated against in reversal.
My question in this thread is a simple one. Do men in many cases find themselves being tyrannized by a variety of sexual cultural roles and pressures when it concerns social expectations?
Modern men have their own glass houses they retire to daily and I think this is a discussion worth discussing more.
This just does not fit my experience. I have been in environments that were highly feminist, and I repeatedly encountered women discussing the tight roles men were forced to live in. Sometimes this was discussed on the angry side against men, sometimes sympathetic, but it was a regular part of the discussion that men were also stuck in roles.
This was not me meeting a stray feminist here and there. This is from the experience of encountering very large numbers, many of them well known writers/feminists and represented a wide range of the women in a couple of generations of feminists.
I am absolutely sure you are incorrect about the above.
Probably the most disturbing aspect of this topic is that feminist and neo-Marxist types have highjacked Humanities departments and turned this whole oppression scenario into “knowledge”. The trend in the Humanities is to deconstruct society, find out who the oppressed groups are, find out who the ruling groups are, and then by an ingenious twist, claim the oppressed are actually the “good” and the rulers are the “bad”. The brilliant cunning of the feminists and neo-Marxists is to moralize these structures and convince students and others that their morality is actually objective. Anyone who criticizes them is automatically named a Nazi, ‘needs to get laid’, is backward, misogynist, fascist, etc. It is their control over the language as to what counts as their stroke of genius.
The insidious nature of their methodology knows no bounds. What the deconstructionists have done is to subvert the intentional meanings of texts. Texts are no longer examined for what the true intentions of the author was, now they are deconstructed in such a way as to find signs of oppression. The question when confronting a text is not: What is the author really trying to say here? It is now, rather: Is there any oppression of women, blacks, foreigners, non-English/European speaking people to be found?
The further rape of knowledge can be found in their screeching for “freedom” from oppression; as if one can actually pull oneself out of the causal link of events and not be subjected to any kind of influence. Contrary to their beliefs, life is relational in character; we are subjected to forces, structures, institutions at all times. The causa sui is a pipe dream. Perhaps if they ceased reading their neo-Marxist texts and read something on the history of the free will problem their rage wouldn’t be as acute.
Honestly, where is the knowledge or even slight objective attempt to understand history and society? It seems academics just want to produce a bunch of perpetually pissed off students who rage against authority (only if they are white and male of course).
If the Australian anti-discrimination commission was serious about discrimination based on negative stereotyping, then Humanities departments would be 98% cleaned out.
Most women will refuse to be identified as feminists.
Most people in the US see feminists as manhaters and as problems.
There are plenty of women who aren’t feminists, in fact most. So how can these feminists have destroyed everything?
Isn’t it the traditional women who want men to have money, since they see their role as running the household and taking care of the children? But then they are bad since you dislike them for wanting men with means. Feminist women, or at least women out in the work force do not have to be supported in the same ways by men, and sure, may want them to also have a job, but are not expecting to be supported by them remotely as much. But they are bad because they emasculate men.
What is a good woman to do?
But really these women, both kinds, were all controlling men all along.
First of all, no woman in her right mind would want to ‘emasculate’ a man–but notice, please, I said “… in her right mind.” I’ve witnessed women who do, often successfully, and through the use of sex attempt to emasculate men, but they’re not really a part of a feminist ideology–they’re simply egoistic, power-hungry and, in many ways, sadistic.
Feminism, as a ‘movement,’ started in the 16th century–not to ‘dominate’ men but to share in the recognition of intellectual pursuit. Women were kept from education at the time–and yet, they showed their good minds through their contributions to the ‘arts.’ They often had to assume masculine ‘nom de plumes’ in order to be published–or recognized–in an educated, male-dominated, ‘thought’ world. Do men really feel they’ve been emasculated, tyrannized over, or prejudiced against by women who really only want to be accepted for their minds?
That’s a silly thought, imm, and shows that some men prefer all of the masculine ‘traits’ of being ‘stronger,’ more capable because of that strength, more accepted in a masculine world because of culture, and still willing to poo-poo the idea that women can and do think.
I feel guilty even commenting on either of these threads because they are so bizarre and dark.
Yeah, what?
I mean, even if this was the case, that men are being tyrannized over by women, what then? You develop oppositional deconstructionist texts which attempt to draw out threads of female-dominance in Homer? There are plenty of books devoted to Achilles and the way he defines virtue and courage (read: masculinity).
I guess I have just had totally different experiences with feminists than you have. They don’t make me feel emasculated at all, to the contrary. When I talk to a feminist about philosophy or politics, that’s about the only time having a deep conversation makes me feel more masculine, is when it’s a conversation with a feminist. Otherwise I usually just feel like a sniveling intellectual nerd-face. Maybe feminists are just particularly sensitive to the plight of the nerd-face. My masculinity makes no sense to non-feminists because I am not interested in normal man-stuff. When a woman has made me feel emasculated in the past, which sure, has happened, I don’t think she was a feminist.
If your masculinity involves battles of wits on ILP, I suggest you put down the Dworkin for a minute and go make friends with a feminist. You will have an engaging conversation and feel good about yourself. I am absolutely sure about that.
To me it is primarily men who force both men and women to have specific roles. In high school it was the other boys, often with the use of words like ‘faggot’ and ‘wimp’ who were training all of us how to move, stand, talk, not talk, how not to emote, etc., to avoid getting shamed at the least and our asses kicked at the most.
When I see men or women confront gender stereotypes, sure, both men and women can get on their cases. But the prime physical violence enforcing those rules comes from men, as far as I can see.
From women I have always gotten mixed messages about how to be: they seem to want me macho, sensitive, highly sexed, passive, in control, letting them be in control, and so on, a whole batch of mixed messages. Not easy at all, I absolutely admit. Whatever one does, one runs into problems. But with other men, there are clear choices to be made. And the rules are enforced harshly.
IOW I can’t blame women for my choices since nothing is clear and there is no clear way to avoid problems or get a relationship/(laid. But with men clear messages are put out about how I have to be in the world to not be a piece of shit, fag, someone to beat up.
I think men also send women mixed messages about how they should be, the whole madonna whore thing. But overall there are clearer messages AND breaches are punished violently. Of course this is only by a small portion of the men. Only a small number are violent against women. But I just see nothing like this kind of enforcement on the other side.
Well, sure. I know families where the woman is boss. I am not saying this is universal. But if I have to pick one sex for having greater enforcement, I see see it as the men.
And sure, I’ve gone through a lot of relationships and the politics therein.
I mentioned a few reasons for believing this.
Two I will repeat.
If I step out of what is considered the norm for males, women may avoid me. I may not get this or that relationship on that day or sex.
My chances of getting beaten up or killed go up that day and this comes from men.
Much has relationships and sex are priorities for me, survival is higher.
The same survival issue holds in the workplace, where men still have more power. If I act regularly out of my gender role, I am much more likely to be let go. Sure, I’ll find it harder to have romance there also, but this runs a clear second in my concerns.
I leave the rights to those who despise, and abhor, and feel disgust towards things, as they are the “healthy” ones in a world of girlish word-games with those infinite twists and turns.
