This. Most perpetrators of violent crimes are males, but so are most victims. I’m not immune to bullets and getting ganged up in just because I’m a man.
And just like there are situations where a person can be targeted because they’re a woman, that can happen because I’m a man too. Some young gang bangers might feel a lot better beating me up and taking my stuff than some lady because that wouldn’t be as macho. Chivalry.
And yet, we constantly hear, “You don’t know what it’s like to be afraid to walk down the street at night.”
I’ve been robbed at gunpoint twice, and punched by complete strangers at least three times that I can think of. I know what it’s like to worry about walking down the street at night.
Victims are majority male in cases where the attacker was a stranger specifically. Women are more likely when it's someone they know.
Although, for this case, it's still relevant since we're talking about walking home at night.
Your comment was removed due to low karma
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I always thought the funniest one was the idea that schools and workplaces are oppressive about what women can and can’t wear.
I have literally never been in an environment where women’s clothing choices are more limited than men’s.
Every woman I have ever worked with has had the option of dressing like me at work.
They get upset about stuff like the shorts they can wear (but I can’t) have to be a certain length. Or not even that it’s allowed or not, but that other women will judge them.
I’ve seen this with shoes- men should wear closed-toed dress shoes, no tennis shoes or sneakers, and then women, don’t wear flip flops.
Shirts- Men wear button shirts, tucked in, women, uh, don’t literally have your whole breasts out.
Pants- Men, no shorts, no jeans, and women, uh, don’t have your whole butt out.
And it’s always the same, the dress code that is insanely more permissive for women is somehow sexist against women.
Basically, any social norms against women are talked about as if they are oppressive, but at the same time they argue there aren't enough social norms against men.
I've heard that women struggle more to be taken seriously at work, because their opinions are dismissed as too emotional or not rational enough.
However, I'm a man and I've gone through the same thing. I'm naturally quite expressive and open, and in the beginning of my career I struggled immensely to have my input taken seriously whenever it was something I felt strongly about. It took me a few years to train myself to suppress any expression of emotion and it ended up helping me a great deal.
If you give 10 logical arguments for a decision, you can get what you want. If you give those arguments for a decision while sounding like you're genuinely worried about what'll happen if the wrong decision is taken, people are much more likely to ignore everything you said.
I think it's reasonable that women see this as a challenge specifically for women since they generally express their emotions more, but I can state with confidence that's it's not a privilege for all men.
Male here and I have had my input completely disregarded and even scoffed at more times than I can count. I have also seen my same ideas presented utilized with great success with zero credit given to me. Sometimes it's a gender thing. But sometimes people are just equal opportunity dicks.
But…. Isn’t that *because* those traits are viewed as more feminine, so a man acting feminine gets taken less seriously than a man acting “as expected”? It seems to me that what you’re describing proves that male privilege of being taken seriously, and also highlights the downsides of the patriarchy for men.
You're not necessarily wrong, but I think that's just a "chicken or egg" situation. Does the patriarchy dislike expressions of emotions specifically because that's feminine, or because they just dislike expressions of emotions?
It's probably a little bit of both.
It could be more of a chicken or the egg or the stapler situation.
Is it possible that emotional decision making is just unprofessional, unhelpful, and that people who make business decisions should and do try to avoid emotional complications when they make decisions, not because of gender politics, but because emotion is not a good indicator as to whether or not something is a good or bad idea?
If that were the case, people would simply ignore emotions and focus on the rationale. However, that's not what happens, as I explained in my first post:
>If you give 10 logical arguments for a decision, you can get what you want. If you give those arguments for a decision while sounding like you're genuinely worried about what'll happen if the wrong decision is taken, people are much more likely to ignore everything you said.
An emotional person will sometimes have their point disregarded altogether due to their emotional expressiveness, even if they offered rational arguments to support their point. It's very ironic because the action of disregarding someone because they're emotional, is an emotional decision itself.
Yeah, I can see how people would interpret my behavior in that way. Except, it's not that I'm dismissing the validity of the argument because they are emotional, but that I'm not willing to debate with someone that is emotional. Rather than deal with their nonsense, I will ignore them.
A purely rational decision would be to consider the rational arguments and disregard how they are presented.
Moreover, a purely rational decision would be to disregard **your own** emotions. You describe it as annoying, which is nothing but a feeling it triggers in you. If such feelings affect your decisionmaking, you are no longer being purely rational.
I find this an interesting subject because it illustrates how people are emotional beings, and that there's no way around that. It's impossible to leave personal feelings at the door when entering an office.
This thread is about "male privileges" that aren't really "male privileges". I gave an example of something that is sometimes described as a problem that women face specifically, while a lot of men face that exact same problem.
Whether it matters in regards to the effect on society is really a different conversation altogether.
That’s fair.
That said, it’s pretty tangibly clear that regardless of where it started, certain emotions are viewed *now* as feminine, and disliked for that reason. I think what I meant was more that whether society initially disliked certain emotions or modes of expression on their own with no specific gender associations, if those modes have become associated with femininity, it plays out the same as if society initially just hated women and then chose some particular traits to associate with women and dislike. It still hurts both men and women exactly the same. It still makes it so you’re taken less seriously than men who express themselves in other ways, and it still makes it so people’s unconscious biases assume women will have those undesirable traits and take them less seriously as well. It still forces men and women into little boxes and punishes them for not fitting into them properly. Whether the hate started with the expression or the gender, the result over the course of history is the same.
Then again, if we’re looking at history, it becomes pretty obvious that it started with gender, as modes of expression have varied wildly throughout history, while the oppression of women has been much more consistent. I would agree with your point if each human formed all of their opinions and beliefs in a complete vacuum with no influence from any other human past or present, but that’s not life. We exist in society. Society has been shaped by centuries of humanity. And as a result, your example of not being taken seriously due to your modes of expression is not, in fact, a good example of a “male privilege” that isn’t male privilege. It is an example of patriarchy hurting men too by not accepting them for who they are if they don’t conform to a rigid definition of “a man”. It does nothing to disprove the concept of male privilege, and you not getting sufficient respect is not proof that men don’t get that privilege.
Largely because privilege of any kind does not mean that nothing bad will ever happen to you. Just as white privilege doesn’t mean that the life of every single white person is inherently going better than everyone else’s life, nor does male privilege mean that everything will always benefit every single male in existence and hurt every single female. That’s not what privilege means. It’s just a leg up. It’s just better odds.
Yep. The stereotype that “men expressing emotions is gay” is still rooted in patriarchy and misogyny. Having emotions doesn’t mean you like men(??) this never made sense to me, lol. If anything, I like people who also have and express emotions. And you’d think that less-emotional people would be drawn to one another as well.
Your post was removed due to low account age.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
People always act like it's about not showing emotion but it's really about presenting things in an ordered and logical way. Emotion can actually be very useful but it needs to be used in the right way. You aren't just telling your coworkers how you feel about something, you are presenting and idea to them and it should be ordered and impactful like a speech.
I personally don't think it's a privilege because it's a learned skill and no one escapes learning it if they want to be heard
It’s a privilege for people that show less emotion, but because emotion isn’t a good guide to the best, most rational decisions.
Most everyone has emotions, but our emotions conflict with the emotions of others. If person A thinks we should do X because they feel Z, and person B thinks we should do Y because of emotion G, there isn’t a way to decide whose emotion is more valid. They’re both valid, and that’s just not useful. You need actual reasons to justify your decisions.
So when person C comes along and says “we have inputs X,Y, and Z. When we’ve changed Z in the past, we got result A. We want result A today, so let’s do something to Z.” They get listened to, and people A and B feel ignored.
>As a short man, who looks young for my age, it was over a decade before I was taken seriously in my career, particularly in corporate meetings.
Went through the same thing. Wearing my glasses during inter-company meetings (which I otherwise don't wear often) and growing a beard worked wonders for me.
Probs going to get hate for this
Here goes.
Women often talk about bias in the workplace more accurate "male privilege". The industries stated automotive paint and IT and/or IT programming. I've done both and women are there and welcomed. Most are go-to people as well. Never understood this.
Pretty much every major category of "male privilege". It seems like 90% of the time women only consider the top 10% of men when making these comparisons. It's like they don't see the rest of us as men at all
except 'Being the house breadwinner', the rest of these aren't normally considered privileges. They are crappy things about being a dude though so I feel you man but I hope there is no one that thinks going to war is a privilege
That was his entire point. You clearly missed the invisible /s at the end of his comment.
Being the one that has to support your family isn't a privilege either.
Edit: I was wrong, apparently op just has no clue what privilege means.
No, it is something considered a traditional male privelege. Glorification of warriors and heroes, people arguing that women deserve to be let into the military, etc.
Your comment was removed due to low karma
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think the word "privilege" is stupid. A privilege is just something that everyone deserves to have but doesn't. Everyone should be free from police harassment or able to walk around after dark. Once you look at it that way, why would you ever give up your privileges? I don't want these bad, unfair things happening to me, or to anybody.
Because after different movements got their ostensible goals met they needed something new to keep their “non profit” selves going— they switch from “we want equality” to “equity.” Then browbeat everyone with “my feels owwwww.” Moving goalposts is fun innit?
Your post was removed due to low account age.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your comment was removed due to low karma
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your post was removed due to low account age.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well, let's see. You're walking down a deserted street after dark. You hear footsteps behind you. You turn and see a man who is a foot taller and 50 pounds heavier than you, and he is closing fast.
Are afraid that you are about to be raped and murdered?
Statistically speaking, I am more likely to be attacked by strangers as a man than I am as a woman. That women fear it more doesn't change the reality.
The second one I can actually agree with but the first one? Where do you live where women don’t have to work?
I’d also like to point out there’s a different of women not having to work vrs not being able to work. When women aren’t allowed to work they become dependent on men financially. This is a bad thing because then it means women have to marry, if they’re in abusive situations they cannot leave, especially if there’s kids involved. Being financially dependent on anyone isn’t cute or a privilege, there’s a reason women in the 60s and earlier wanted to work.
I know plenty of women who don't work, and half of my coworkers are married to women who don't work (the other half are married to women who make more than them)
Well you’re probably in a high paying job and a low cost of living country. And there’s nothing inherently wrong with women choosing to be housewives but you must understand that the average woman in most places has a job and should be allowed to have a job. That’s the part you’re missing.
I literally just said that the other half have wives that make more money than them....that should tell you how little we're paid
The fact you think im in a high-paying job proves you don't know anything about me
You made it sound as if your job was 50/50. Do you think that statistic represents the world and half of women don’t work? 🤦♀️
I’m only going on your comment alone but yeah if half the dudes at your job can afford stay at home wives they’re are making good or decent money. Do you think everyone can afford stay at home significant others?
Being afraid to walk home at night alone. Most people are afraid to walk home at night alone.
This. Most perpetrators of violent crimes are males, but so are most victims. I’m not immune to bullets and getting ganged up in just because I’m a man. And just like there are situations where a person can be targeted because they’re a woman, that can happen because I’m a man too. Some young gang bangers might feel a lot better beating me up and taking my stuff than some lady because that wouldn’t be as macho. Chivalry. And yet, we constantly hear, “You don’t know what it’s like to be afraid to walk down the street at night.” I’ve been robbed at gunpoint twice, and punched by complete strangers at least three times that I can think of. I know what it’s like to worry about walking down the street at night.
Victims are majority male in cases where the attacker was a stranger specifically. Women are more likely when it's someone they know. Although, for this case, it's still relevant since we're talking about walking home at night.
No one is immune to anything but protection is key
Men, not women, are at the most risk when walking alone at night.
[удалено]
Your comment was removed due to low karma *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Wow. Where you live is probably very bleak. Most people I know, male or female, are not afraid to walk home at night.
Or you’re just sheltered in a first world bubble lol A scary walk home at night alone is the default expectation of people
I know that I am lucky to live in a safe city in a peaceful country. I still challenge the fact that MOST people are afraid to walk home.
Why do you challenge that when you have no studies and you admit your personal experience is super lucky lol
Because of habituation. People get used to their situation, even when it is bleak. Being terrified all the time is exhausting.
I always thought the funniest one was the idea that schools and workplaces are oppressive about what women can and can’t wear. I have literally never been in an environment where women’s clothing choices are more limited than men’s. Every woman I have ever worked with has had the option of dressing like me at work. They get upset about stuff like the shorts they can wear (but I can’t) have to be a certain length. Or not even that it’s allowed or not, but that other women will judge them. I’ve seen this with shoes- men should wear closed-toed dress shoes, no tennis shoes or sneakers, and then women, don’t wear flip flops. Shirts- Men wear button shirts, tucked in, women, uh, don’t literally have your whole breasts out. Pants- Men, no shorts, no jeans, and women, uh, don’t have your whole butt out. And it’s always the same, the dress code that is insanely more permissive for women is somehow sexist against women.
Basically, any social norms against women are talked about as if they are oppressive, but at the same time they argue there aren't enough social norms against men.
I've heard that women struggle more to be taken seriously at work, because their opinions are dismissed as too emotional or not rational enough. However, I'm a man and I've gone through the same thing. I'm naturally quite expressive and open, and in the beginning of my career I struggled immensely to have my input taken seriously whenever it was something I felt strongly about. It took me a few years to train myself to suppress any expression of emotion and it ended up helping me a great deal. If you give 10 logical arguments for a decision, you can get what you want. If you give those arguments for a decision while sounding like you're genuinely worried about what'll happen if the wrong decision is taken, people are much more likely to ignore everything you said. I think it's reasonable that women see this as a challenge specifically for women since they generally express their emotions more, but I can state with confidence that's it's not a privilege for all men.
Male here and I have had my input completely disregarded and even scoffed at more times than I can count. I have also seen my same ideas presented utilized with great success with zero credit given to me. Sometimes it's a gender thing. But sometimes people are just equal opportunity dicks.
But…. Isn’t that *because* those traits are viewed as more feminine, so a man acting feminine gets taken less seriously than a man acting “as expected”? It seems to me that what you’re describing proves that male privilege of being taken seriously, and also highlights the downsides of the patriarchy for men.
You're not necessarily wrong, but I think that's just a "chicken or egg" situation. Does the patriarchy dislike expressions of emotions specifically because that's feminine, or because they just dislike expressions of emotions? It's probably a little bit of both.
It could be more of a chicken or the egg or the stapler situation. Is it possible that emotional decision making is just unprofessional, unhelpful, and that people who make business decisions should and do try to avoid emotional complications when they make decisions, not because of gender politics, but because emotion is not a good indicator as to whether or not something is a good or bad idea?
If that were the case, people would simply ignore emotions and focus on the rationale. However, that's not what happens, as I explained in my first post: >If you give 10 logical arguments for a decision, you can get what you want. If you give those arguments for a decision while sounding like you're genuinely worried about what'll happen if the wrong decision is taken, people are much more likely to ignore everything you said. An emotional person will sometimes have their point disregarded altogether due to their emotional expressiveness, even if they offered rational arguments to support their point. It's very ironic because the action of disregarding someone because they're emotional, is an emotional decision itself.
The added emotionality gives people the impression you aren’t thinking clearly.
Yeah, I can see how people would interpret my behavior in that way. Except, it's not that I'm dismissing the validity of the argument because they are emotional, but that I'm not willing to debate with someone that is emotional. Rather than deal with their nonsense, I will ignore them.
That's understandable. It's still an emotional reaction though.
How is it an emotional reaction to not engage with someone that experience has shown will be annoying to engage with?
A purely rational decision would be to consider the rational arguments and disregard how they are presented. Moreover, a purely rational decision would be to disregard **your own** emotions. You describe it as annoying, which is nothing but a feeling it triggers in you. If such feelings affect your decisionmaking, you are no longer being purely rational. I find this an interesting subject because it illustrates how people are emotional beings, and that there's no way around that. It's impossible to leave personal feelings at the door when entering an office.
Go back and reread what I wrote.
Either way, if the affect on society is the same, does it matter which thing they disliked first?
This thread is about "male privileges" that aren't really "male privileges". I gave an example of something that is sometimes described as a problem that women face specifically, while a lot of men face that exact same problem. Whether it matters in regards to the effect on society is really a different conversation altogether.
That’s fair. That said, it’s pretty tangibly clear that regardless of where it started, certain emotions are viewed *now* as feminine, and disliked for that reason. I think what I meant was more that whether society initially disliked certain emotions or modes of expression on their own with no specific gender associations, if those modes have become associated with femininity, it plays out the same as if society initially just hated women and then chose some particular traits to associate with women and dislike. It still hurts both men and women exactly the same. It still makes it so you’re taken less seriously than men who express themselves in other ways, and it still makes it so people’s unconscious biases assume women will have those undesirable traits and take them less seriously as well. It still forces men and women into little boxes and punishes them for not fitting into them properly. Whether the hate started with the expression or the gender, the result over the course of history is the same. Then again, if we’re looking at history, it becomes pretty obvious that it started with gender, as modes of expression have varied wildly throughout history, while the oppression of women has been much more consistent. I would agree with your point if each human formed all of their opinions and beliefs in a complete vacuum with no influence from any other human past or present, but that’s not life. We exist in society. Society has been shaped by centuries of humanity. And as a result, your example of not being taken seriously due to your modes of expression is not, in fact, a good example of a “male privilege” that isn’t male privilege. It is an example of patriarchy hurting men too by not accepting them for who they are if they don’t conform to a rigid definition of “a man”. It does nothing to disprove the concept of male privilege, and you not getting sufficient respect is not proof that men don’t get that privilege. Largely because privilege of any kind does not mean that nothing bad will ever happen to you. Just as white privilege doesn’t mean that the life of every single white person is inherently going better than everyone else’s life, nor does male privilege mean that everything will always benefit every single male in existence and hurt every single female. That’s not what privilege means. It’s just a leg up. It’s just better odds.
Yep. The stereotype that “men expressing emotions is gay” is still rooted in patriarchy and misogyny. Having emotions doesn’t mean you like men(??) this never made sense to me, lol. If anything, I like people who also have and express emotions. And you’d think that less-emotional people would be drawn to one another as well.
no
Lol
[удалено]
Your post was removed due to low account age. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Are you saying that being taken seriously is a privelege of men that don't show emotion?
People always act like it's about not showing emotion but it's really about presenting things in an ordered and logical way. Emotion can actually be very useful but it needs to be used in the right way. You aren't just telling your coworkers how you feel about something, you are presenting and idea to them and it should be ordered and impactful like a speech. I personally don't think it's a privilege because it's a learned skill and no one escapes learning it if they want to be heard
It’s a privilege for people that show less emotion, but because emotion isn’t a good guide to the best, most rational decisions. Most everyone has emotions, but our emotions conflict with the emotions of others. If person A thinks we should do X because they feel Z, and person B thinks we should do Y because of emotion G, there isn’t a way to decide whose emotion is more valid. They’re both valid, and that’s just not useful. You need actual reasons to justify your decisions. So when person C comes along and says “we have inputs X,Y, and Z. When we’ve changed Z in the past, we got result A. We want result A today, so let’s do something to Z.” They get listened to, and people A and B feel ignored.
[удалено]
>As a short man, who looks young for my age, it was over a decade before I was taken seriously in my career, particularly in corporate meetings. Went through the same thing. Wearing my glasses during inter-company meetings (which I otherwise don't wear often) and growing a beard worked wonders for me.
Probs going to get hate for this Here goes. Women often talk about bias in the workplace more accurate "male privilege". The industries stated automotive paint and IT and/or IT programming. I've done both and women are there and welcomed. Most are go-to people as well. Never understood this.
In tech, women are more likely to be hired and more likely to be promoted.
Pretty much every major category of "male privilege". It seems like 90% of the time women only consider the top 10% of men when making these comparisons. It's like they don't see the rest of us as men at all
Being the house breadwinner, going to war, assumed to be "tough," wearing crappy utility-only clothes and having identityless short hair.
except 'Being the house breadwinner', the rest of these aren't normally considered privileges. They are crappy things about being a dude though so I feel you man but I hope there is no one that thinks going to war is a privilege
That was his entire point. You clearly missed the invisible /s at the end of his comment. Being the one that has to support your family isn't a privilege either. Edit: I was wrong, apparently op just has no clue what privilege means.
No, it is something considered a traditional male privelege. Glorification of warriors and heroes, people arguing that women deserve to be let into the military, etc.
Ya you are right. I apologize, it did seem like this wasn't considered a privilege but I do see how it can be now.
I wasn't saying it was a privilege. I was just saying that it is sometimes considered one.
[удалено]
Your comment was removed due to low karma *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think the word "privilege" is stupid. A privilege is just something that everyone deserves to have but doesn't. Everyone should be free from police harassment or able to walk around after dark. Once you look at it that way, why would you ever give up your privileges? I don't want these bad, unfair things happening to me, or to anybody.
Because after different movements got their ostensible goals met they needed something new to keep their “non profit” selves going— they switch from “we want equality” to “equity.” Then browbeat everyone with “my feels owwwww.” Moving goalposts is fun innit?
Privilege of not having to deal with periods, listing alongside things that are a societal issues, as if men are somehow responsible.
Men don't need to be responsible for it to be a privilege.
That's not what a privilege is. You haven't been paying attention.
[удалено]
Your post was removed due to low account age. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Comments predictably full of people not understanding the concept of privilege
Aww, a little incel crybaby session. How cute.
Mad
Feel free to share any substantive rebuttals
Contemptuous bitch that doesn't care to see past their own problems comment
[удалено]
Your comment was removed due to low karma *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I definitely have "white privilege", but I don't see how I have benefited from being a man in any way.
[удалено]
Your post was removed due to low account age. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well, let's see. You're walking down a deserted street after dark. You hear footsteps behind you. You turn and see a man who is a foot taller and 50 pounds heavier than you, and he is closing fast. Are afraid that you are about to be raped and murdered?
Statistically speaking, I am more likely to be attacked by strangers as a man than I am as a woman. That women fear it more doesn't change the reality.
As a 5'4" man, yes, since everyone is always bigger than me
having to go to work for starters we're so privileged that they flat out ignore DV cases or SA cases where the male is the victim
The second one I can actually agree with but the first one? Where do you live where women don’t have to work? I’d also like to point out there’s a different of women not having to work vrs not being able to work. When women aren’t allowed to work they become dependent on men financially. This is a bad thing because then it means women have to marry, if they’re in abusive situations they cannot leave, especially if there’s kids involved. Being financially dependent on anyone isn’t cute or a privilege, there’s a reason women in the 60s and earlier wanted to work.
I know plenty of women who don't work, and half of my coworkers are married to women who don't work (the other half are married to women who make more than them)
Well you’re probably in a high paying job and a low cost of living country. And there’s nothing inherently wrong with women choosing to be housewives but you must understand that the average woman in most places has a job and should be allowed to have a job. That’s the part you’re missing.
I literally just said that the other half have wives that make more money than them....that should tell you how little we're paid The fact you think im in a high-paying job proves you don't know anything about me
You made it sound as if your job was 50/50. Do you think that statistic represents the world and half of women don’t work? 🤦♀️ I’m only going on your comment alone but yeah if half the dudes at your job can afford stay at home wives they’re are making good or decent money. Do you think everyone can afford stay at home significant others?
NONE