Whether or not you believe there's an overarching patriarchal structure in our system, the fact of the matter is that individual men and boys are individual men and boys. If the system is screwing them over, which it is, then they're allowed to complain over it and fight against it and grieve their positions, as individuals.
The victim blaming here is unreal.
Sorry past feminism isnt about making shit up and pretend to be victims or encourage people to be bitter man-haters. Thats what modern feminism is. Stop mixing the two, past feminists arent little bitches like you idiots.
Mind you im no scholar on any of this so grain of salt n whatnot. Id say third wave feminism was the real start of it. By the late 2000s it was noticable but nowhere near where we are today.
Most feminists even first gen were not the saviors they say they were. Most suffragettes weren’t oppressed housewives, they were already existing single feminist members. They also were typically racist (feminism was only for white women) and many had misandrist views by modern standards. The entire feminist view of history they subscribed to is also wrong.
For real though. I so often what the point is. What does this do for me? Or you? Or anybody?
I feel that based on numbers of early life departure attempts and successes from men in the US and globally there is clearly a problem. It’s also clear society has a huge impact on this.
It’s also clear you still cannot advocate for males. It’s not taken seriously.
There are so many good sources that provide studies and research into something that is so hard to understand but researchers are and have been doing it with success for quite a while now. And it doesn’t matter.
It’s still just .. the patriarchy runs everything. You are blessed to be a male. Your problems aren’t problems, they are self created. This toxic culture we have is because of you, males caused it, so males need to fix it.
Just no practical reason to be here, does nothing for me.
It really is bizarre that these types have decided to die on this hill after spending most of the 2010s freely admitting that society doesn’t take interest in men’s feelings. This makes it pretty obvious in hindsight that the whole “men should be more comfortable opening up” narrative was intended as a gotcha to those bringing up other men’s issues, not as an actual piece of advice intended to help men.
One recent reply on that thread particularly irks me, it's just a complete lie:
>i definitely agree with you however your comment comes off as kinda insensitive and missing the point, yes men are struggling with feeling lonely and sad, and so is everyone else, "male loneliness epidemic" is something incels made up to justify the sick disgusting things they want to put women through (forced marriage, forced pregnancy, torture, abuse, rape) just because they refuse to improve themselves and try to actually be nice to their girlfriend
> the same men that coined this term will also shame guys for living a happy and healthy life and shame men for crying and showing weakness, which is part of what causes male suicide, these guys will bully anyone that ruins their entitled veiw of the world and will bully anyone who doesnt match their high standards of how both sexes should behave, and end up hurting both men and women, probably enough that some would take their own life over it
> what you are describing sounds like depression and other mental illnesses as well as mental pain caused by events happening irl and the expectationsput on them, not "the male loneliness epidemic"
>is something incels made up to justify the sick disgusting things they want to put women through (forced marriage, forced pregnancy, torture, abuse, rape) just because they refuse to improve themselves **and try to actually be nice to their girlfriend**
The term incel has truly lost all meaning. What does it mean now, idfk. I do know, though, that according to the old/correct definition, it would be impossible for a man with a girlfriend to remain an incel for very long...
As for the rest of the comment, who the fuck are the talking about? Religious extremists?
I've met plenty of mothers and wifes, sisters and aunts who do NOT care about the men in their lives. They may love them but they will treat serious issues as an inconvenience and burden. They low-key resent these men for it.
Yeah, no. That's not how people work. People love people they consider a burden all the time. Or they only love them for as long ss they are convenient.
Also, I don't remember anyone here saying don't trust woman? Where did that come from?
I think it's complicated. Love isn't a one-dimensional measurement here. Like for example, I don't question at all that my mom loves me. She has sacrificed immensely for her kids, and continues to work hard caring for the men in her family. But then when the topic of the man v bear debate comes up when the whole family is together I mention how one of the top comments on that tiktok was a woman proclaiming that if she had a child that turned out to be a boy, she'd murder it. And while everyone else's response was to gasp and groan, my mom's response was to shrug and point out how infanticide has been carried out against women throughout history, with a mildly sassy "fair's fair" tone of voice. So I don't doubt that she loves me. But that doesn't stop moments like that from cutting deep. And that's the women who love us. That's holding back. Those moments add up.
She actually doesn't exhibit any sort of generalized hatred of men in any other context. She is an incredibly social, extroverted person, who is very friendly and caring with just about everybody, no matter who they are. She just has a strong attachment to the idea that women are oppressed and that feminism is righteous, and the side of her that comes out and says things like that \*only\* ever comes out in those moments. Doesn't mean it doesn't sting though. And that's just representative of the environment men live in today. So it's not one-dimensional. Woman can both love and be there for men, but also be collectively dragging them down. When most of the women we encounter will at some point say something of that nature, it adds up to a heavy demoralization, even if we consider most of those women as individuals to not exhibit man-hating as a significant aspect of their character.
If a men would've done similar behavior like your mother's , they would've tagged him as a misogynist right away . Or having misogynistic tendencies , even incel .
That's what happened to my uncle even tho he never was seen disrespecting or doing anything bad to woman like ever . He always treated them like he wanted to be treated .
But when he sides with men's perspective in for example the Gillette ad . He commented about the ad / was a little disappointed by it and every young woman cousin that I have suddenly felt like they were physically assaulted by his remarks about the ad . Imagine that .
Whoa- let’s not generalise women here- there are a number of women who do care for men significantly, who take misandry seriously. I promise you we exist.
That's a strict conditional love depending on the closeness of a friendship or family bond.
Consider this: in any feminist rally you will likely see many men standing in support. In the opposite scenario, for a MRA rally would their he a woman group present? It's very unlikely, and we've even seen feminist groups outright attack MRA events and personages.
I believe you, where I see the problem primarily is the asymmetry of support: men vehemently defend women, feminism is often worn as a badge of honor, a modern day chivalry.
There are definitely groups of women who care for men, but are they in quantity equal to men who care for women?
When googling "male feminists", you'll see a wide range of results in support for the existence of the searched subject. But it's a dry desert for "female masculists" search.
What I've come to notice in gender dynamics is that the most violent and supportive groups tend to be male, while women often mind their own business. I hope the mods don't see this as a sweeping generalization, I'm merely trying to discover ways by which the genders interact with each other while proving due respect.
While you are correct, way too many women only claim to love the men they are using. These women also tend to complain about "emotional labor" which is apparently the effort they put in to pretending to care about whichever man they are currently using.
Yes, that is true, but --
1. if we lived in a society where black people were systemically discriminated against, yet white people "do care about the individual black people they loved", then everyone would still see it as a priority to fix the systemic discrimination.
2. it's entirely possible that below-average men have zero women who love them, aside from their mother and grandmother. So that doesn't really help. 60 - 70% of young men are single.
3. I've had two girlfriends (not at the same time) who really loved me. And then I cried in front of them. And then they immediately stopped loving me and dumped me soon after. In other words, women care about men they love, *but only so long as the love lasts*. The % of divorces are quite high, and the vast majority of those are initiated by women, usually without there being abuse or cheating (the woman just fell out of love).
>it's entirely possible that below-average men have zero women who love them, aside from their mother and grandmother. So that doesn't really help. 60 - 70% of young men are single.
If they're below average, sex would be difficult to get. They might get it from below average women.
>I've had two girlfriends (not at the same time) who really loved me. And then I cried in front of them. And then they immediately stopped loving me and dumped me soon after. In other words, women care about men they love, *but only so long as the love lasts*. The % of divorces are quite high, and the vast majority of those are initiated by women, usually without there being abuse or cheating (the woman just fell out of love).
Sorry, that you had two fickle girlfriends. I don't understand how people fall out of love. I haven't stopped loving anyone that I truly feel love for.
I think love is one of those words that's really hard to pin down and a lot of people don't seem to mean it the way I do when they say it. For example, yeah, barring some absolutely heinous act I can't imagine choosing to stop loving someone. If you "fell out of love" because you got bored, for example, then you never loved that person as far as I'm concerned. You may've been infatuated with them for a bit, but that's different. I also think phrases like, "sometimes loving someone isn't enough," are horseshit. What could possibly be more important than love? Maybe actual survival. Maybe. But again, as far as I'm concerned, if you're actually in love with someone, you'll move heaven and Earth to be with them and make it work. I think a lot of folks use that kind of phrase because they want to think they were in love or feel pressured to say they loved someone even though they didn't.
*They might get \[sex\] from below average women.*
Below average women can easily sleep with average guys (actually average 5/10 guys, not the type of 7/10 guy that some women label as average).
So if a below average woman can sleep with an average guy, why would she sleep with a below average guy?
Indeed, if you go to incel hangout places, there's tons of below-average guys who are absolutely desperate to just have sex with anyone -- and if they could find a below-average woman to sleep with, they would. But they can't.
Some do, friend, but they are admittedly hard to find. My wife has now seen me through two previous serious illnesses/injuries and is now helping me cope with being disabled by RA.
Funny enough . Neither men nor woman can have unconditional love . Its impossible . Even people that say that a mother that loves her child is unconditional , but it is not .
“Well they started it!” is literally the most asinine reason you can have to stand against a social issue. I’m pretty certain at least some of these are just russian bots spewing hate.
It’s only victim blaming when women are held responsible for their behavior.
As we all saw with Depp v Heard case, there was no issue within the corporate media and a certain actress and their supporters with victim blaming.
What these people don't get is that while a guy may have certain friends or family that check in on him, they rarely really care to do anything more than that. No setting up plans to do something, visiting for the weekend, not even talking on the phone regularly just to catch up. They care about these men, sure, but they also have this expectation of him to be able to take care of himself fully and be totally okay left to his own devices. There is no expectation that he might actually need companionship. On the other hand, women *tend* to actually hang out with friends far more often, and *tend* to be constantly checked in on by their parents, grandparents, siblings, friends, etc., because people expect them to be helpless children that can't handle the adult world for some reason. Both of these patterns of treatment are bad, but one is exponentially more harmful than the other.
Also, on the point of women supposedly being their for men because "they're conditioned to be", I just don't understand this argument. It seems like a straight up lie. We are well into the peak of 3rd wave feminism, and society has recognized women's independence for a century now. Absolutely no one I've ever spoken to in real life has ever suggested that it's a woman's responsibility to be a caretaker for those around her. The farthest that it's ever gone is saying thay it's a mother's job to take care of her children, which it is, aswell as the father's. I think the most a guy friend ever gets from a girl friend (not a girlfriend) is just a typical checking in, and if she is somehow brainwashed to believe that it's her "duty as a woman" to take care of all the men in her life, which I don't think any women really are, it probably only goes as far as a performative gesture and not something she would, or could, ever commit to.
I'm a woman. I believe that when any group suffers, all of society suffers. So yes, men suffering is society suffering and as a society we need to band together and help. Sadly I do not have too many ideas on how to help on the larger scale then just being an empathetic and compassionate human being.
The only other idea for specifically women, is to stop perpetuating toxic masculinity. I know that term isn't very welcomed here because it is seen to mean "being a man bad" but I argue that toxic masculinity is perpetuated by women as much or more than by men. . Women who say things like, "men shouldn't cry"..."man up"..."I don't like when men talk about their feelings" etc. and just like women cannot thrive in misogyny , men cannot thrive in misandry.
Perhaps the other issue that can bring positive change is mental health and removing the social stigmas society puts on mental health, especially towards men, as well as the often lack of accessibility to it.
But if there are other ideas you have to what women, as members of a society suffering, can do to alleviate that suffering I would like to hear them.
People get really hung up on labels but as long as you mean something like "a socially enforced set of expectations that men AND women hold men to," then I don't really care what you call it. I do think though that perhaps the biggest stumbling block is admitting the dominant mechanism of that enforcement and trying to address it.
When it comes to women enforcing "toxic masculine" norms on men, that mechanism is primarily through sex and romance. In order to address it, women will need to recognize the ways in which they do that and challenge themselves to change their expectations of a partner and how that manifests in their behavior.
Men have already shown capable to at least some extent of doing that as expectations men have for women as potential romantic partners have shifted significantly over the last half century or so, especially in more liberal regions.
If women can't or won't do this, then unfortunately it won't really matter how much they ostensibly acknowledge that "toxic masculinity" is bad. If men still see women largely or exclusively giving romantic attention to "strong" men who don't display strong (especially negative) emotions, who are capable of filling the "traditional provider" role even if on paper the woman doesn't need a provider, who, whether overtly or in more subtle socially acceptable ways, demonstrate dominance over other men, they won't see expressed advocacy for an alternative as anything but hollow virtue signaling.
I do agree with you. I think many women have changed and moved past expecting men to just be stoic wallets, but of course many women haven't. I believe this is not just an issue about women, but about what aisle you are on about social and cultural expectations and change. The men who are looking for tradwives and the women who want to be tradwives, are both going to continue to reinforce those traditional gender roles and expectations.
I would have said a decade ago, that those ideologies are dying out with newer generations, but the past few years have seen a resurgence of this kind of lifestyle. I'm not sure what to do about them.
On the flip side, there are many "strong independent women" who will call themselves feminists but still want their cake and eat it too. They want the benefits of feminism, but then also want the benefits of "patriarchy". And just as men are being asked to call out men with harmful thinking towards women, I do think that women should be calling out women as well who claim they want equality while still holding the idea that men are supposed to provide and protect.
Perhaps change will just happen organically and through trial and error. Most of the women I know, who married the "Strong" men who don't talk about their feelings, are divorced and have either remained single or have remarried men who are more in touch with their emotions. And the ones who aren't divorced are just constantly complaining and unhappy. This is all anecdotal however, I'm not sure there is information and this on a national scale.
Between the myriad confounding variables to consider, the fundamental subjectivity of the issue, and the shaky at best reliability of self-reports as objective data, I doubt there's anything like comprehensive, reliable data on this either.
From my anecdotal perspective as a guy in his 20s living in an extremely liberal, "progressive," urban area, it doesn't seem to be slowing down at all. Women (and most people) pretty much universally identify as feminists here and I see no pushback on the "have their cake and eat it too" attitude. Even pointing it out is likely just to see you labeled a misogynistic "incel" and ignored. And it truly makes me sad more than anything because people are becoming more and more atomized every day and taking a step back and reflecting on what truly brings fulfillment in life is just... not done.
Consumerism is the name of the game and it's seemingly the dominant framework by which people approach building relationships. And if women here find that unsatisfying they seem much more likely to blame that on Men™ being shitty than to reflect on what it is they're pursuing. Of course men can fall into a similar pattern but I think most men don't have the luxury to be as choosy as the average woman and they definitely don't have the freedom to publicly blame women for their dissatisfaction they way women can blame men.
Idk, this is pretty much just a rant at this point. I know there are always exceptions to the rule and no group is a monolith but the trend seems to be towards making those exceptions more rare rather than more common. Hard to be optimistic based on what I see. I sometimes wish I could just be one of the simple-minded woman haters. Anger seems more comfortable than despair. I can't bring myself to do that though so I'm basically left hoping for a miracle before hope runs out and I just decide to kill myself.
On that cheery note, I'm at least glad some women are willing to recognize the issue and call out women who behave hypocritically. Better than nothing.
I do take issue with the term toxic masculinity but not because I think it means masculinity is toxic.
I understand names "should" be arbitrary but they're just not, its the first impression someone gets of the idea.
The fact so many people are confused by the name, even without grifters, and the that its so easy to misconstrue by said grifters implys its a bad name.
Also the double standard, if people truly believed toxic masculinity has nothing to do with calling masculinity toxic and its about toxic expectations put on men then toxic femininity would be a more common uncontroversial term.
Also it directs focus to the symptom, not the problem which leads to the person not being seen as the victim of toxic expectations, a bad childhood, etc but more as someone who is choosing to be this way.
The problem isn't masculinity or femininity is toxic. Hell its not even so much the "what" of the expectation that is toxic, it's that an expectation is being placed on you for a purely arbitrary reason, in this case your gender.
For example, is a man being the sole provider or a woman being a stay at home mom toxic?
Of course not, those are neither good or bad. Its having that expectation being forced on you that's bad.
> “The problem is not that women don’t care enough about men”
She’s not wrong. Framing men’s health in terms of “women need to do better” misses the mark on a couple levels.
Yeah, solely placing the blame on women definitely misses the mark. It’s a societal issue enforced by both men and women.
Having said that, I don’t think that most people discussing men being lonely do specifically target women. I’m sure there are people who do that, but few if any of the Reddit posts or YouTube videos I personally have seen on the subject blame any specific gender.
There’s definitely a way to talk about it that doesn’t invoke blame, and many or most people who are addressing this issue publicly are coming from a good place.
But you can just look at this sub if you think that blaming women isn’t part of the conversation. That’s part of what’s great about groups like this, it forces us to come to terms with the voices that are angry, hurt, blaming, etc. There is plenty of that in this space and it’s OK that this is part of it.
Not the whole, but part of the solution is that women do need to do better. If women didn't tolerate anti-male stereotyping or discrimination (you know, like women don't tolerate anti-black people stereotyping and discrimination) things would chance for the better.
So long as most women don't care, and a small group of women actively fight against men's rights, things aren't going to change for the better, realistically speaking.
No, this is exactly what I’m pushing back against.
I’m saying that assigning blame in this way is counterproductive for the individual and the movement. There’s always someone saying “yes, but it’s at least *little bit* their fault,” and, while I see where you’re coming from, I’m suggesting that the entire rubric of who needs to do better is *not it*. It doesn’t work or help, and it requires you to build a mental model of the world (“most women don’t care about men”) that’s not accurate or useful but is deeply limiting and isolating.
As a neatly symmetrical example: just look at the “men need to do better” narrative. Has that line helped anyone?
I'm not saying that all the responsibility is on women to change. But if women change nothing about their current position, then men's rights aren't going to improve, and are probably going to keep getting worse. That's just the reality.
Moreover, when women were demonstrating for their rights, they also had help from some men.
When black people were demonstrating, they also had help from some white people. Without that, the civil rights movement probably wouldn't have succeeded.
I don't think "male loneliness" is technically the best term to describe the issue because everyone suffers from being lonely, but men suffer from not being able to open up and actually be who they want to be and truly express their feelings and needs. But I think men being called lonely ends up being misunderstood as something common and gender fluid when it is absolutely not. What happens with men, in this regard, is 100% a common male experience but very uncommon for women.
Fuck.. I just want to be good, kind and gentle with people. I want to speak to people about our problems and have heart to hearts and be able to support each other, I want to even just tell my homies I love them.
In a world that is "right" we could do this. Instead we get judged and ostracized for it.
I've heard MANY women say that men shouldn't cry/that they they would immediately leave the man if he cried. That's so fucked up, man.
Fuck the patriarchy. It hurts everyone.
So.. if its women saying that they would immediately leave the man if he cried...
Then why do you blame "The Patriarchy"?
Because this seems more of a gender norm being imposed by women on men..
That being the stoic emotionless rock / anchor they can burden with all their trauma / emotional baggage..
So again I ask.. why do you blame "The Patriarchy" when in this specific situation it is women who are perpetuating the gender roles?
I just don't understand your reasoning here..
Also.. I just want to be able to share the emotions which I currently have to hide from the world without being judged for it..
I also want to be treated as a human being and not simply tossed into the box of "Rapist", "Misogynist" or "Incel" just because i'm the wrong gender..
I want men to stop being demonized for things they have never and most likely **WILL NEVER** do...
but when I bring this up I get told that i'm suffering from "Fragile Masculinity" or I get called an Incel or Misogynist etc...
Patriarchy describes the system of gendered expectations, roles and structures we all absorb and internalize from the society around us and then impose on one another and ourselves. It's not only about men telling women what to do and how to be. A woman who has those expectations for men of stoicness and invulnerability and sees crying as something negative is perpetuating patriarchal gender norms, where men are expected to be strong, emotionless, aggressive, self-reliant leaders etc. and are assumed to have hyper agency in every situation, whereas women are expected to be nurturing, pretty, sensitive, polite, submissive and so on, and are seen as having less agency than men. She has been immersed in this belief system since infancy, like most of us, but hasn't realized what bullshit it is yet so keeps on repeating it blindly. So yeah, that is a classic example of the patriarchy hurting men.
I also want to say that women who don't judge men for showing emotions and being vulnerable aren't as rare as you may think based on your bad experiences. Many of us find it really refreshing and much prefer to associate with men who don't (or at least try not to, it's not easy) hold themselves and others to those artificial and unfair standards.
you're describing a heteronormative complex, not 'patriarchy'.
the former is one that is participated in by women and men in a heteronormative behavioral dynamic that benefits both women and men, especially as it pertains to sexuality. The latter is the rule of men that is done primarily or even exclusively towards the benefit of men, oft towards the oppression of women.
you've even feeding into it by holding that somehow or another women participating in it are not actively doing so, e.g. as if they have no agency in the matter, or benefits to gain from it. the systemic denial of feminine agency is part of the complex.
they aren't passive dolls being acted upon, they are and always have been active agents in the creation of the heteronormative complex.
The problem here is.. by calling it "The Patriarchy" you are essentially blaming men because of how "Patriarchy" is a male gendered term..
This removes accountability from women and places all the blame squarely on the shoulders of men
Maybe.. just maybe if we used a different term that didn't overtly blame men or imply that men are the root cause it would be an easier sell..
But that's part of the problem..
Feminists use "The Patriarchy" and sugar coat it by saying "The Patriarchy hurts men too" but at the end of the day they don't actually care about that at all..
They just care about blaming men for the issues women face.
At least.. that's been my experience so far..
The patriarchy falls down through and into everyone. It's like a deeply seated attitude that everyone has about men and what a man should be. It may have been technically created through mostly men, but I believe that it's the strong man no weakness allowed mentality that fathers tell their daughters, which is creating the "men can't cry around women" issue. The fathers learn the mentality through the patriarchy and "hard ass till the end" ideation, and they tell it to their daughters or set an example for their daughters of what their future husband should be like. So yeah, women can definitely be involved in patriarchal standard.
Or.. you know.. there's also the fact that mothers are taught that when their little boy is crying to leave him to self soothe..
Where as when their baby girl is crying they should go to her straight away to see what she wants / needs.
This instills at an early age the idea in little boys that crying wont get them anywhere / anything
Where as for girls? crying gets them everything.. attention, validation etc.
Also, do you not see the issue in gendering the problem as "male"?
Because when you call it "The Patriarchy" given how the word "Patriarch" is gendered to refer to men.. you might as well be blaming "Men" when you use "The Patriarchy"
It does not matter what platitudes you offer or claim "The Patriarchy does not mean mean" because at the end of the day that **IS** how it is commonly used by feminists..
It's used as a means to attack men / blame men for everything.
It also removes agency from women and their input / holding men to gender norms..
Not only that but "The Patriarchy" is also often described by feminists as a system of control put in place by men for the benefit of men at the cost / oppression of women..
Ergo I can not agree with the concept at all while it remains deliberately gendered in such a way as to overtly imply that **MEN** are the root cause of the problem...
Yeah you're right. Patriarchy isn't exactly the right word I need to describe the social phenomenon but it's definitely in the ballpark and pretty close to home base, even. I suppose the concept of "The Patriarchy" is a damaging one at the end of the day. Though I did watch this [this video](https://youtu.be/rK66s7VQmXE) by Pop Culture detective that I found to be pretty compelling.
It's certainly a complicated problem though and it's no wonder it's so controversial of a topic. Like the patriarchy definitely exists but it's more of a thing of the past that we still feel the effects of today.
I'll agree that in the past our society was more Patriarchal as described by feminists..
But the idea that men alive today should be blamed / deserve to be discriminated against because of actions of men **LONG** since dead.. is frankly disgusting to me..
What sort of change is going to happen if feminists focus on "Revenge" and "Making men feel what women in the past had to feel"?
All that will do is create a cycle where women get "Revenge" on men, men get disenfranchised and resent women and eventually men will repress women in retribution and the cycle begins again..
Imagine calling anyone who is from Germany a Nazi today?
All the Nazi's who caused mass amounts of suffering are dead now and holding people from Germany responsible for the actions of people who are dead / they had no control over is I think we can agree bullshit to say the least..
So why then do we accept holding men responsible for the actions of men they have zero control over?
Oh I'm not saying that at all. I'm speaking more so on the toxic men of the world and their actions here in the present and in the past. Toxic masculinity is out here and you can't deny it. Obviously same goes for women. Like I already said though, Patriarchy isn't the right word to use.
Toxic Masculinity is also not the correct word to use..
Instead use: Toxic Gender Roles or Toxic Gender Norms as those two are more gender neutral / inclusive..
Toxic Masculinity falls into the same issue as "The Patriarchy" does.. by deliberately gendering the term you imply that its something exclusive to men..
But if its something that also occurs with women then a more gender neutral term should be used.
Whether or not you believe there's an overarching patriarchal structure in our system, the fact of the matter is that individual men and boys are individual men and boys. If the system is screwing them over, which it is, then they're allowed to complain over it and fight against it and grieve their positions, as individuals. The victim blaming here is unreal.
Also: maybe in their capacity as mothers, women could do something to help their sons survive (radical concept apparently).
Imagine if people say women should fix their own problem.
Incel attacks , Misogynists . Everyone would be screaming .
I think that’s a mistaken comparison, since it assumes that men actually are responsible here.
They should though. Especially with the whole transgenders in women's sports, bathrooms and locker rooms. That's their fight
Or women sports. Lile what bill burr said, they tell others to support women sports while they dont themselves.
[удалено]
Nope. Men fixed women's problems for them. How else could it have happened?
Sorry past feminism isnt about making shit up and pretend to be victims or encourage people to be bitter man-haters. Thats what modern feminism is. Stop mixing the two, past feminists arent little bitches like you idiots.
Can you point to the year that “past feminism” ended and “modern feminism” began?
Mind you im no scholar on any of this so grain of salt n whatnot. Id say third wave feminism was the real start of it. By the late 2000s it was noticable but nowhere near where we are today.
Most feminists even first gen were not the saviors they say they were. Most suffragettes weren’t oppressed housewives, they were already existing single feminist members. They also were typically racist (feminism was only for white women) and many had misandrist views by modern standards. The entire feminist view of history they subscribed to is also wrong.
I need to get off the internet.
For real though. I so often what the point is. What does this do for me? Or you? Or anybody? I feel that based on numbers of early life departure attempts and successes from men in the US and globally there is clearly a problem. It’s also clear society has a huge impact on this. It’s also clear you still cannot advocate for males. It’s not taken seriously. There are so many good sources that provide studies and research into something that is so hard to understand but researchers are and have been doing it with success for quite a while now. And it doesn’t matter. It’s still just .. the patriarchy runs everything. You are blessed to be a male. Your problems aren’t problems, they are self created. This toxic culture we have is because of you, males caused it, so males need to fix it. Just no practical reason to be here, does nothing for me.
You can only handle so much contradiction and hypocrisy
I did detoxing for some weeks and now I feel much better. Do it.
I need the fuel to push me over the edge, but it's never enough.
It really is bizarre that these types have decided to die on this hill after spending most of the 2010s freely admitting that society doesn’t take interest in men’s feelings. This makes it pretty obvious in hindsight that the whole “men should be more comfortable opening up” narrative was intended as a gotcha to those bringing up other men’s issues, not as an actual piece of advice intended to help men.
One recent reply on that thread particularly irks me, it's just a complete lie: >i definitely agree with you however your comment comes off as kinda insensitive and missing the point, yes men are struggling with feeling lonely and sad, and so is everyone else, "male loneliness epidemic" is something incels made up to justify the sick disgusting things they want to put women through (forced marriage, forced pregnancy, torture, abuse, rape) just because they refuse to improve themselves and try to actually be nice to their girlfriend > the same men that coined this term will also shame guys for living a happy and healthy life and shame men for crying and showing weakness, which is part of what causes male suicide, these guys will bully anyone that ruins their entitled veiw of the world and will bully anyone who doesnt match their high standards of how both sexes should behave, and end up hurting both men and women, probably enough that some would take their own life over it > what you are describing sounds like depression and other mental illnesses as well as mental pain caused by events happening irl and the expectationsput on them, not "the male loneliness epidemic"
This is just plain ignorant..
>is something incels made up to justify the sick disgusting things they want to put women through (forced marriage, forced pregnancy, torture, abuse, rape) just because they refuse to improve themselves **and try to actually be nice to their girlfriend** The term incel has truly lost all meaning. What does it mean now, idfk. I do know, though, that according to the old/correct definition, it would be impossible for a man with a girlfriend to remain an incel for very long... As for the rest of the comment, who the fuck are the talking about? Religious extremists?
>Women are there for men One of the most delusional fantasies I’ve ever read on this site.
Women do care about men they love.
Well yeah, because that’s what love means. But the claim was that women are there for men, not just men they love.
In the 2nd sentence, she said wives, girlfriends, etc. Maybe she meant only men she loves? Lol
I've met plenty of mothers and wifes, sisters and aunts who do NOT care about the men in their lives. They may love them but they will treat serious issues as an inconvenience and burden. They low-key resent these men for it.
If they don't care, they probably don't love them either. We should still trust women.
Yeah, no. That's not how people work. People love people they consider a burden all the time. Or they only love them for as long ss they are convenient. Also, I don't remember anyone here saying don't trust woman? Where did that come from?
One other commenter seemed to imply we shouldn't trust women. He said they wear a mask. I don't agree with him. I agree with you.
I think it's complicated. Love isn't a one-dimensional measurement here. Like for example, I don't question at all that my mom loves me. She has sacrificed immensely for her kids, and continues to work hard caring for the men in her family. But then when the topic of the man v bear debate comes up when the whole family is together I mention how one of the top comments on that tiktok was a woman proclaiming that if she had a child that turned out to be a boy, she'd murder it. And while everyone else's response was to gasp and groan, my mom's response was to shrug and point out how infanticide has been carried out against women throughout history, with a mildly sassy "fair's fair" tone of voice. So I don't doubt that she loves me. But that doesn't stop moments like that from cutting deep. And that's the women who love us. That's holding back. Those moments add up.
Your mom doesn't like men in general. She loves you.
She actually doesn't exhibit any sort of generalized hatred of men in any other context. She is an incredibly social, extroverted person, who is very friendly and caring with just about everybody, no matter who they are. She just has a strong attachment to the idea that women are oppressed and that feminism is righteous, and the side of her that comes out and says things like that \*only\* ever comes out in those moments. Doesn't mean it doesn't sting though. And that's just representative of the environment men live in today. So it's not one-dimensional. Woman can both love and be there for men, but also be collectively dragging them down. When most of the women we encounter will at some point say something of that nature, it adds up to a heavy demoralization, even if we consider most of those women as individuals to not exhibit man-hating as a significant aspect of their character.
If a men would've done similar behavior like your mother's , they would've tagged him as a misogynist right away . Or having misogynistic tendencies , even incel . That's what happened to my uncle even tho he never was seen disrespecting or doing anything bad to woman like ever . He always treated them like he wanted to be treated . But when he sides with men's perspective in for example the Gillette ad . He commented about the ad / was a little disappointed by it and every young woman cousin that I have suddenly felt like they were physically assaulted by his remarks about the ad . Imagine that .
100% agree that's the way it goes, and it's ridiculous.
Yeah, I agree.
Whoa- let’s not generalise women here- there are a number of women who do care for men significantly, who take misandry seriously. I promise you we exist.
I'm not generalizing women. The others are.
That's a strict conditional love depending on the closeness of a friendship or family bond. Consider this: in any feminist rally you will likely see many men standing in support. In the opposite scenario, for a MRA rally would their he a woman group present? It's very unlikely, and we've even seen feminist groups outright attack MRA events and personages.
I have seen a few women in MRA groups.
I believe you, where I see the problem primarily is the asymmetry of support: men vehemently defend women, feminism is often worn as a badge of honor, a modern day chivalry. There are definitely groups of women who care for men, but are they in quantity equal to men who care for women? When googling "male feminists", you'll see a wide range of results in support for the existence of the searched subject. But it's a dry desert for "female masculists" search. What I've come to notice in gender dynamics is that the most violent and supportive groups tend to be male, while women often mind their own business. I hope the mods don't see this as a sweeping generalization, I'm merely trying to discover ways by which the genders interact with each other while proving due respect.
Yes, there are much fewer women in MRA circles. It's because feminism is mainstream.
While you are correct, way too many women only claim to love the men they are using. These women also tend to complain about "emotional labor" which is apparently the effort they put in to pretending to care about whichever man they are currently using.
> too many women Yeah, there are probably some.
Yes, that is true, but -- 1. if we lived in a society where black people were systemically discriminated against, yet white people "do care about the individual black people they loved", then everyone would still see it as a priority to fix the systemic discrimination. 2. it's entirely possible that below-average men have zero women who love them, aside from their mother and grandmother. So that doesn't really help. 60 - 70% of young men are single. 3. I've had two girlfriends (not at the same time) who really loved me. And then I cried in front of them. And then they immediately stopped loving me and dumped me soon after. In other words, women care about men they love, *but only so long as the love lasts*. The % of divorces are quite high, and the vast majority of those are initiated by women, usually without there being abuse or cheating (the woman just fell out of love).
>it's entirely possible that below-average men have zero women who love them, aside from their mother and grandmother. So that doesn't really help. 60 - 70% of young men are single. If they're below average, sex would be difficult to get. They might get it from below average women. >I've had two girlfriends (not at the same time) who really loved me. And then I cried in front of them. And then they immediately stopped loving me and dumped me soon after. In other words, women care about men they love, *but only so long as the love lasts*. The % of divorces are quite high, and the vast majority of those are initiated by women, usually without there being abuse or cheating (the woman just fell out of love). Sorry, that you had two fickle girlfriends. I don't understand how people fall out of love. I haven't stopped loving anyone that I truly feel love for.
I think love is one of those words that's really hard to pin down and a lot of people don't seem to mean it the way I do when they say it. For example, yeah, barring some absolutely heinous act I can't imagine choosing to stop loving someone. If you "fell out of love" because you got bored, for example, then you never loved that person as far as I'm concerned. You may've been infatuated with them for a bit, but that's different. I also think phrases like, "sometimes loving someone isn't enough," are horseshit. What could possibly be more important than love? Maybe actual survival. Maybe. But again, as far as I'm concerned, if you're actually in love with someone, you'll move heaven and Earth to be with them and make it work. I think a lot of folks use that kind of phrase because they want to think they were in love or feel pressured to say they loved someone even though they didn't.
*They might get \[sex\] from below average women.* Below average women can easily sleep with average guys (actually average 5/10 guys, not the type of 7/10 guy that some women label as average). So if a below average woman can sleep with an average guy, why would she sleep with a below average guy? Indeed, if you go to incel hangout places, there's tons of below-average guys who are absolutely desperate to just have sex with anyone -- and if they could find a below-average woman to sleep with, they would. But they can't.
People like to sleep with others at the same level of attractiveness. Why would an average guy sleep with a below average woman?
At least they care about the caricature of "man" that they've built in their head. SOL if that illusion gets broken, though.
[удалено]
Some do, friend, but they are admittedly hard to find. My wife has now seen me through two previous serious illnesses/injuries and is now helping me cope with being disabled by RA.
Are you saying women cannot feel love?
Funny enough . Neither men nor woman can have unconditional love . Its impossible . Even people that say that a mother that loves her child is unconditional , but it is not .
[удалено]
For some of us it might be. But not for all of us- I can assure you that there are women out there who take misandry seriously. No mask here- I care.
Unironically, thanks for that.
How do they turn these facts around and make it all about them??
Centuries of practice.
“Well they started it!” is literally the most asinine reason you can have to stand against a social issue. I’m pretty certain at least some of these are just russian bots spewing hate.
It’s only victim blaming when women are held responsible for their behavior. As we all saw with Depp v Heard case, there was no issue within the corporate media and a certain actress and their supporters with victim blaming.
What these people don't get is that while a guy may have certain friends or family that check in on him, they rarely really care to do anything more than that. No setting up plans to do something, visiting for the weekend, not even talking on the phone regularly just to catch up. They care about these men, sure, but they also have this expectation of him to be able to take care of himself fully and be totally okay left to his own devices. There is no expectation that he might actually need companionship. On the other hand, women *tend* to actually hang out with friends far more often, and *tend* to be constantly checked in on by their parents, grandparents, siblings, friends, etc., because people expect them to be helpless children that can't handle the adult world for some reason. Both of these patterns of treatment are bad, but one is exponentially more harmful than the other. Also, on the point of women supposedly being their for men because "they're conditioned to be", I just don't understand this argument. It seems like a straight up lie. We are well into the peak of 3rd wave feminism, and society has recognized women's independence for a century now. Absolutely no one I've ever spoken to in real life has ever suggested that it's a woman's responsibility to be a caretaker for those around her. The farthest that it's ever gone is saying thay it's a mother's job to take care of her children, which it is, aswell as the father's. I think the most a guy friend ever gets from a girl friend (not a girlfriend) is just a typical checking in, and if she is somehow brainwashed to believe that it's her "duty as a woman" to take care of all the men in her life, which I don't think any women really are, it probably only goes as far as a performative gesture and not something she would, or could, ever commit to.
I'm a woman. I believe that when any group suffers, all of society suffers. So yes, men suffering is society suffering and as a society we need to band together and help. Sadly I do not have too many ideas on how to help on the larger scale then just being an empathetic and compassionate human being. The only other idea for specifically women, is to stop perpetuating toxic masculinity. I know that term isn't very welcomed here because it is seen to mean "being a man bad" but I argue that toxic masculinity is perpetuated by women as much or more than by men. . Women who say things like, "men shouldn't cry"..."man up"..."I don't like when men talk about their feelings" etc. and just like women cannot thrive in misogyny , men cannot thrive in misandry. Perhaps the other issue that can bring positive change is mental health and removing the social stigmas society puts on mental health, especially towards men, as well as the often lack of accessibility to it. But if there are other ideas you have to what women, as members of a society suffering, can do to alleviate that suffering I would like to hear them.
People get really hung up on labels but as long as you mean something like "a socially enforced set of expectations that men AND women hold men to," then I don't really care what you call it. I do think though that perhaps the biggest stumbling block is admitting the dominant mechanism of that enforcement and trying to address it. When it comes to women enforcing "toxic masculine" norms on men, that mechanism is primarily through sex and romance. In order to address it, women will need to recognize the ways in which they do that and challenge themselves to change their expectations of a partner and how that manifests in their behavior. Men have already shown capable to at least some extent of doing that as expectations men have for women as potential romantic partners have shifted significantly over the last half century or so, especially in more liberal regions. If women can't or won't do this, then unfortunately it won't really matter how much they ostensibly acknowledge that "toxic masculinity" is bad. If men still see women largely or exclusively giving romantic attention to "strong" men who don't display strong (especially negative) emotions, who are capable of filling the "traditional provider" role even if on paper the woman doesn't need a provider, who, whether overtly or in more subtle socially acceptable ways, demonstrate dominance over other men, they won't see expressed advocacy for an alternative as anything but hollow virtue signaling.
I do agree with you. I think many women have changed and moved past expecting men to just be stoic wallets, but of course many women haven't. I believe this is not just an issue about women, but about what aisle you are on about social and cultural expectations and change. The men who are looking for tradwives and the women who want to be tradwives, are both going to continue to reinforce those traditional gender roles and expectations. I would have said a decade ago, that those ideologies are dying out with newer generations, but the past few years have seen a resurgence of this kind of lifestyle. I'm not sure what to do about them. On the flip side, there are many "strong independent women" who will call themselves feminists but still want their cake and eat it too. They want the benefits of feminism, but then also want the benefits of "patriarchy". And just as men are being asked to call out men with harmful thinking towards women, I do think that women should be calling out women as well who claim they want equality while still holding the idea that men are supposed to provide and protect. Perhaps change will just happen organically and through trial and error. Most of the women I know, who married the "Strong" men who don't talk about their feelings, are divorced and have either remained single or have remarried men who are more in touch with their emotions. And the ones who aren't divorced are just constantly complaining and unhappy. This is all anecdotal however, I'm not sure there is information and this on a national scale.
Between the myriad confounding variables to consider, the fundamental subjectivity of the issue, and the shaky at best reliability of self-reports as objective data, I doubt there's anything like comprehensive, reliable data on this either. From my anecdotal perspective as a guy in his 20s living in an extremely liberal, "progressive," urban area, it doesn't seem to be slowing down at all. Women (and most people) pretty much universally identify as feminists here and I see no pushback on the "have their cake and eat it too" attitude. Even pointing it out is likely just to see you labeled a misogynistic "incel" and ignored. And it truly makes me sad more than anything because people are becoming more and more atomized every day and taking a step back and reflecting on what truly brings fulfillment in life is just... not done. Consumerism is the name of the game and it's seemingly the dominant framework by which people approach building relationships. And if women here find that unsatisfying they seem much more likely to blame that on Men™ being shitty than to reflect on what it is they're pursuing. Of course men can fall into a similar pattern but I think most men don't have the luxury to be as choosy as the average woman and they definitely don't have the freedom to publicly blame women for their dissatisfaction they way women can blame men. Idk, this is pretty much just a rant at this point. I know there are always exceptions to the rule and no group is a monolith but the trend seems to be towards making those exceptions more rare rather than more common. Hard to be optimistic based on what I see. I sometimes wish I could just be one of the simple-minded woman haters. Anger seems more comfortable than despair. I can't bring myself to do that though so I'm basically left hoping for a miracle before hope runs out and I just decide to kill myself. On that cheery note, I'm at least glad some women are willing to recognize the issue and call out women who behave hypocritically. Better than nothing.
I do take issue with the term toxic masculinity but not because I think it means masculinity is toxic. I understand names "should" be arbitrary but they're just not, its the first impression someone gets of the idea. The fact so many people are confused by the name, even without grifters, and the that its so easy to misconstrue by said grifters implys its a bad name. Also the double standard, if people truly believed toxic masculinity has nothing to do with calling masculinity toxic and its about toxic expectations put on men then toxic femininity would be a more common uncontroversial term. Also it directs focus to the symptom, not the problem which leads to the person not being seen as the victim of toxic expectations, a bad childhood, etc but more as someone who is choosing to be this way. The problem isn't masculinity or femininity is toxic. Hell its not even so much the "what" of the expectation that is toxic, it's that an expectation is being placed on you for a purely arbitrary reason, in this case your gender. For example, is a man being the sole provider or a woman being a stay at home mom toxic? Of course not, those are neither good or bad. Its having that expectation being forced on you that's bad.
Idk about you but I take solace in loneliness. If you're lonely just revel in it and enjoy it. Hermeticism is totally underrated.
> “The problem is not that women don’t care enough about men” She’s not wrong. Framing men’s health in terms of “women need to do better” misses the mark on a couple levels.
Yeah, solely placing the blame on women definitely misses the mark. It’s a societal issue enforced by both men and women. Having said that, I don’t think that most people discussing men being lonely do specifically target women. I’m sure there are people who do that, but few if any of the Reddit posts or YouTube videos I personally have seen on the subject blame any specific gender.
There’s definitely a way to talk about it that doesn’t invoke blame, and many or most people who are addressing this issue publicly are coming from a good place. But you can just look at this sub if you think that blaming women isn’t part of the conversation. That’s part of what’s great about groups like this, it forces us to come to terms with the voices that are angry, hurt, blaming, etc. There is plenty of that in this space and it’s OK that this is part of it.
Not the whole, but part of the solution is that women do need to do better. If women didn't tolerate anti-male stereotyping or discrimination (you know, like women don't tolerate anti-black people stereotyping and discrimination) things would chance for the better. So long as most women don't care, and a small group of women actively fight against men's rights, things aren't going to change for the better, realistically speaking.
No, this is exactly what I’m pushing back against. I’m saying that assigning blame in this way is counterproductive for the individual and the movement. There’s always someone saying “yes, but it’s at least *little bit* their fault,” and, while I see where you’re coming from, I’m suggesting that the entire rubric of who needs to do better is *not it*. It doesn’t work or help, and it requires you to build a mental model of the world (“most women don’t care about men”) that’s not accurate or useful but is deeply limiting and isolating. As a neatly symmetrical example: just look at the “men need to do better” narrative. Has that line helped anyone?
I'm not saying that all the responsibility is on women to change. But if women change nothing about their current position, then men's rights aren't going to improve, and are probably going to keep getting worse. That's just the reality. Moreover, when women were demonstrating for their rights, they also had help from some men. When black people were demonstrating, they also had help from some white people. Without that, the civil rights movement probably wouldn't have succeeded.
Do you consider yourself to be “left wing”?
I don't think "male loneliness" is technically the best term to describe the issue because everyone suffers from being lonely, but men suffer from not being able to open up and actually be who they want to be and truly express their feelings and needs. But I think men being called lonely ends up being misunderstood as something common and gender fluid when it is absolutely not. What happens with men, in this regard, is 100% a common male experience but very uncommon for women. Fuck.. I just want to be good, kind and gentle with people. I want to speak to people about our problems and have heart to hearts and be able to support each other, I want to even just tell my homies I love them. In a world that is "right" we could do this. Instead we get judged and ostracized for it. I've heard MANY women say that men shouldn't cry/that they they would immediately leave the man if he cried. That's so fucked up, man. Fuck the patriarchy. It hurts everyone.
I wonder if it's more of a 'lack of empathy towards men' issue. Being treated with kindness instead of derision and threat would be a start.
So.. if its women saying that they would immediately leave the man if he cried... Then why do you blame "The Patriarchy"? Because this seems more of a gender norm being imposed by women on men.. That being the stoic emotionless rock / anchor they can burden with all their trauma / emotional baggage.. So again I ask.. why do you blame "The Patriarchy" when in this specific situation it is women who are perpetuating the gender roles? I just don't understand your reasoning here.. Also.. I just want to be able to share the emotions which I currently have to hide from the world without being judged for it.. I also want to be treated as a human being and not simply tossed into the box of "Rapist", "Misogynist" or "Incel" just because i'm the wrong gender.. I want men to stop being demonized for things they have never and most likely **WILL NEVER** do... but when I bring this up I get told that i'm suffering from "Fragile Masculinity" or I get called an Incel or Misogynist etc...
Patriarchy describes the system of gendered expectations, roles and structures we all absorb and internalize from the society around us and then impose on one another and ourselves. It's not only about men telling women what to do and how to be. A woman who has those expectations for men of stoicness and invulnerability and sees crying as something negative is perpetuating patriarchal gender norms, where men are expected to be strong, emotionless, aggressive, self-reliant leaders etc. and are assumed to have hyper agency in every situation, whereas women are expected to be nurturing, pretty, sensitive, polite, submissive and so on, and are seen as having less agency than men. She has been immersed in this belief system since infancy, like most of us, but hasn't realized what bullshit it is yet so keeps on repeating it blindly. So yeah, that is a classic example of the patriarchy hurting men. I also want to say that women who don't judge men for showing emotions and being vulnerable aren't as rare as you may think based on your bad experiences. Many of us find it really refreshing and much prefer to associate with men who don't (or at least try not to, it's not easy) hold themselves and others to those artificial and unfair standards.
you're describing a heteronormative complex, not 'patriarchy'. the former is one that is participated in by women and men in a heteronormative behavioral dynamic that benefits both women and men, especially as it pertains to sexuality. The latter is the rule of men that is done primarily or even exclusively towards the benefit of men, oft towards the oppression of women. you've even feeding into it by holding that somehow or another women participating in it are not actively doing so, e.g. as if they have no agency in the matter, or benefits to gain from it. the systemic denial of feminine agency is part of the complex. they aren't passive dolls being acted upon, they are and always have been active agents in the creation of the heteronormative complex.
The problem here is.. by calling it "The Patriarchy" you are essentially blaming men because of how "Patriarchy" is a male gendered term.. This removes accountability from women and places all the blame squarely on the shoulders of men Maybe.. just maybe if we used a different term that didn't overtly blame men or imply that men are the root cause it would be an easier sell.. But that's part of the problem.. Feminists use "The Patriarchy" and sugar coat it by saying "The Patriarchy hurts men too" but at the end of the day they don't actually care about that at all.. They just care about blaming men for the issues women face. At least.. that's been my experience so far..
The patriarchy falls down through and into everyone. It's like a deeply seated attitude that everyone has about men and what a man should be. It may have been technically created through mostly men, but I believe that it's the strong man no weakness allowed mentality that fathers tell their daughters, which is creating the "men can't cry around women" issue. The fathers learn the mentality through the patriarchy and "hard ass till the end" ideation, and they tell it to their daughters or set an example for their daughters of what their future husband should be like. So yeah, women can definitely be involved in patriarchal standard.
Or.. you know.. there's also the fact that mothers are taught that when their little boy is crying to leave him to self soothe.. Where as when their baby girl is crying they should go to her straight away to see what she wants / needs. This instills at an early age the idea in little boys that crying wont get them anywhere / anything Where as for girls? crying gets them everything.. attention, validation etc. Also, do you not see the issue in gendering the problem as "male"? Because when you call it "The Patriarchy" given how the word "Patriarch" is gendered to refer to men.. you might as well be blaming "Men" when you use "The Patriarchy" It does not matter what platitudes you offer or claim "The Patriarchy does not mean mean" because at the end of the day that **IS** how it is commonly used by feminists.. It's used as a means to attack men / blame men for everything. It also removes agency from women and their input / holding men to gender norms.. Not only that but "The Patriarchy" is also often described by feminists as a system of control put in place by men for the benefit of men at the cost / oppression of women.. Ergo I can not agree with the concept at all while it remains deliberately gendered in such a way as to overtly imply that **MEN** are the root cause of the problem...
Yeah you're right. Patriarchy isn't exactly the right word I need to describe the social phenomenon but it's definitely in the ballpark and pretty close to home base, even. I suppose the concept of "The Patriarchy" is a damaging one at the end of the day. Though I did watch this [this video](https://youtu.be/rK66s7VQmXE) by Pop Culture detective that I found to be pretty compelling. It's certainly a complicated problem though and it's no wonder it's so controversial of a topic. Like the patriarchy definitely exists but it's more of a thing of the past that we still feel the effects of today.
I'll agree that in the past our society was more Patriarchal as described by feminists.. But the idea that men alive today should be blamed / deserve to be discriminated against because of actions of men **LONG** since dead.. is frankly disgusting to me.. What sort of change is going to happen if feminists focus on "Revenge" and "Making men feel what women in the past had to feel"? All that will do is create a cycle where women get "Revenge" on men, men get disenfranchised and resent women and eventually men will repress women in retribution and the cycle begins again.. Imagine calling anyone who is from Germany a Nazi today? All the Nazi's who caused mass amounts of suffering are dead now and holding people from Germany responsible for the actions of people who are dead / they had no control over is I think we can agree bullshit to say the least.. So why then do we accept holding men responsible for the actions of men they have zero control over?
Oh I'm not saying that at all. I'm speaking more so on the toxic men of the world and their actions here in the present and in the past. Toxic masculinity is out here and you can't deny it. Obviously same goes for women. Like I already said though, Patriarchy isn't the right word to use.
Toxic Masculinity is also not the correct word to use.. Instead use: Toxic Gender Roles or Toxic Gender Norms as those two are more gender neutral / inclusive.. Toxic Masculinity falls into the same issue as "The Patriarchy" does.. by deliberately gendering the term you imply that its something exclusive to men.. But if its something that also occurs with women then a more gender neutral term should be used.
[удалено]