Male problems only ever come up as a counter-argument

[Secondhand Revenant]

I thought it was clear that it was being used as a means of gender war, at least for a period.

Considering that 'gender war' is hardly something people would seem to agree is a thing it'd be an amazing feat for something that depends on the notion to be 'clear'. Considering that the sides are composed of all genders and not one vs one...

I haven't been on this forum much very recently, but I remember the period where people were gleefully running with "yeh, it's the guy's fault!" seemingly for every example being given.

And is there any particular reason the guy couldn't be wrong in those cases aside from feelz that say it can't be the case?

Obviously reality lies between the extremes.

That's not true at all. That's just an emotional argument not based in reality. People feeeeeel like the middle must be right but that's no evidence, there is nothing to support the principle as accurate.

This community is prone to trending hard on this kind of thing, and it's pretty ugly at times.

My guess is prone to disagreeing with you

 

[EvilRoy]

You can hang your entire warped world view on a single theory that has been highly criticized for decades, but stop expecting me to change my view of you.

It hasn't really been criticized more or less than any other given psychological idea. The most arguments have actually been with regards to the extents to which a baseline can possibly change, and the issue of genetics vs upbringing as a root cause.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Considering that 'gender war' is hardly something people would seem to agree is a thing it'd be an amazing feat for something that depends on the notion to be 'clear'. Considering that the sides are composed of all genders and not one vs one...

When I say "I thought it was clear", I mean exactly that. It was clear in my view... The rest of the sentence is stupid in how vague it is though, point taken. What I mean is that it was turned into a "women right, men wrong" thing for many. I think much of the talk was laughable, frankly. The blind leading the blind.

I see your join date. Did you lurk much before joining? Did you witness the plague of "nice guy" threads a while back?

And is there any particular reason the guy couldn't be wrong in those cases aside from feelz that say it can't be the case?

You misunderstand. It's not that they can't be, it's that they aren't automatically. It's a perception thing, but my perception is that at the time the tone of discussion was unfair. Things were assumed that probably shouldn't have been.

That's not true at all. That's just an emotional argument not based in reality. People feeeeeel like the middle must be right but that's no evidence, there is nothing to support the principle as accurate.

Whatevs. Statements can seem more general than they really were when you remove the context they were actually in. The extremes are "men are always wrong, fuck men", and "women are always wrong, fuck women". Both of these are stupid.

Disagree?

As far as "gotcha!" moments go, this is a pretty pathetic one. I don't want to be this petty. Can we just not?

My guess is prone to disagreeing with you

I know.

 

[Lightspeaker]

I think it hearkens back to the misconception that women like jerks, which is not true. Confidence is attractive

Going off on a bit of a tangent but here's another "societal conditioning" thing. Men are expected to be forward and confident or they're viewed as lesser. Not "allowed" to be shy. But shyness in a girl is frequently presented as cute and endearing.

Sorry for hijacking your post and I understand you weren't intending to permeate a damaging expectation but I really, really dislike the whole stereotyped 'requirements' for men and women.

 

[AgedGrunt]

Men don't talk about their problems because it's socially unacceptable to do so. So men's problems are only brought up as a counter-argument because that's the only time it's acceptable to do so - to show that we too have problems, but choose not to talk about them but rather deal with them in silence, the unspoken subtext being that women should do the same. Right or wrong, that's very debatable, but the point is, men do have problems but for the most part, we don't talk about them because what the hell does whining and complaining accomplish? We want solutions, not hand-wringing.

Somehow I doubt anyone but the people bringing it up at that time finds it more acceptable to do that. It's also not a solution, it's the epitome of whining...

One of the few places guys from all over the world wander to and talk about their problems are chan message boards. You know, those dark corners of the internet that most people are convinced are full of whiny, loser, male virgin sociopaths who are non-functional to society and whom people wish would shut up and go away?

Someone just explained to you how many men need an opportunity to even mention that they have problems too, yet they're conditioned to dealing with them on their own, in silence. They showed how that makes men look at a climate of discussion and can see that as "whining" instead of treating our problems, and you call that reaction "the epitome of whining" and shove them back to either deal with their crap or find a quiet corner to talk about their problems.

A few people here show why men struggle to talk about their problems and even why we see this counter-argument phenomenon. Maybe it's easier to attack suffering men as apathetic, whiny nuisances interjecting in other peoples' issues (how ironically toxic a thing to do), but apparently no one analyzes (or cares) why this happens. It's like whining about whining.

 

[Animyr]

It's a choice they make.

The whole point in my last post is that it's a choice they're encouraged to make, pushed to make. Fathers, meanwhile, are not encouraged to drop from the workforce, though their children need them just as much.

therefore there will always be an absolute wage gap.

Except the wage gap appears for most women even before they quit to raise children (thus making the gap even larger), in nearly every profession. I was careful to address this argument in my big post. Did you simply not read all of it?

Women make different life choices than men not because of patriarchy but because of biology

You're completely ignoring nurture and culture here.

Again, it used to be common knowledge that women were, by nature, too weak willed and emotional to accept any social responsibilities outside of childcare (voting, authority over men, etc.)

It used to be common knowledge that blacks were biologically simple minded and childlike, subservient by nature. They're happiest when they're working hard, with whites to lead them. People were so certain of this they went to war for it.

Where did these self-evident biological truths go? In the trash bin, because when the culture changed, the people changed too. Funny that.

And its happening again. Even today, it's widely accepted that women just don't have heads for math or engineering. They're usually softer, more nurturing, less logical then men. Right? But as I noted, even scientists who agree with you have been compelled by the data to accept that the gap in that regard is narrowing and will probably disappear. Has there been a biological change among females? Of course not. It's now more culturally acceptable and desirable for a woman to be good at math.

Likewise, as Lightknight notes, women outnumber men in teaching, childcare, and social work. Is this purely because men choose not to do those things? Or does the fact that they're disfavored in those positions, which are culturally seen as "womanly" have something to do with it? What about the fact that men who are interested in caring for children tend to be seen as pedophiles? Is that a biological fact too? How about the recent rise in single fathers? Does that mean men are biologically changing?

Biology plays a role, certainly. There are tendencies. But culture is every bit as powerful a mover too, and conflating ones culture to fundamental biological imperatives is a dangerous and arrogant thing to do. This is especially true when we still have powerful cultural forces telling both genders what their places are (traditional values, anyone?). Why would such forces be necessary if it was purely biological instinct?

But I guess foisting it all off on fundamental biology is a good way to shut down the conversation, huh? Can't have pesky discussions about change or reform if change is biologically impossible.

 

[EvilRoy]

You can hang your entire warped world view on a single theory that has been highly criticized for decades, but stop expecting me to change my view of you.

It hasn't really been criticized more or less than any other given psychological idea. The most arguments have actually been with regards to the extents to which a baseline can possibly change, and the issue of genetics vs upbringing as a root cause.

It is nothing to base your entire worldview on, and it's just a theory in something that falls short of being a science. Meanwhile medicine tells us just how agonizingly painful starvation is. How painful infestation with parasites is, or slowly dying from anemia.

If you're going to make excuses, make better excuses.

Not really. I just noticed that you didn't actually seem to understand much about the theory so I thought I would address it.

 

[Something Amyss]

Can you believe I found him on the internet?

I met my SO on the internet. They're awesome. They don't always know it, but they're awesome.

I think it hearkens back to the misconception that women like jerks, which is not true. Confidence is attractive, jerks at the very least tend to have more of that than the self proclaimed nice guys, but the nice guys instead draw the conclusion "women like jerks" rather than "women like confidence". The issue with the latter example is that it requires self evaluation.

People who are bad a nuance often equate confidence with "jerk."

I'm not entirely sure the "women like confidence" thing is accurate, or I would be pretty lonely. Most of my partners have been women, and I am not only not confident, but quite self-loathing. In fact, I kind of wonder why anyone can stand me at all.

...ohgodimsodepressedineedtoliedownforawhile

The sad part is (at least in the case of my ex) these nice guys probably actually are very nice. He never lashed out at me when we were together, he was always thoughtful and considerate of my feelings and he was so in tune to them that even when something was wrong and I didn't say anything, he still knew I was hurting and he would do little things to try and make me feel better. If he only had a little confidence, he would have been perfect, unfortunately that's something I couldn't give him and in the end he chose to blame the world for his misfortune and wallow in his own misery, rather than push himself beyond his problems.

Like, I don't know your ex and I'm only speaking personal experience and all, but I really have seen a lot of "nice guys" who seem legitimately hostile and often completely unaware of themselves. And sometimes outright scary. Like, Isla Vista shooter scary.

Obviously, not everyone or anything like that, but I've long had the feeling that "nice guy" is, quite often, a justification, like when people do something horrible and tell themselves they're a good person.

 

[Thaluikhain]

That whole Isla Vista thing, I don't think that most creepy loners go that way, but when a creepy loner does notice how nobody is shocked?

Eh, as long as there's some quick easy reason behind it. Loner/muslim/gamer/listens to music/whatever. As long as it's not one of us doing it, it's not a worry.

 

[EvilRoy]

I don't believe you Roy, I think you're just getting a passive aggressive dig in here because you don't like how this has gone.

Why would I care how this has gone? I'm not the person you were originally talking to. I just noticed you weren't really demonstrating much of an understanding of the concept, and dismissing it out of hand - I thought there might be room for a conversation there.

When you continued by dismissing me out of hand I figured it wasn't worth pursuing. To go further and claim that I "don't know any better" is a pretty straightforward attempt to establish some kind of intellectual dominance and is a pretty firm demonstration that there was never any such possibility.

 

[Raesvelg]

So we have a hearsay account that someone's suicide note blamed the government. What a terribly low bar. You may not like hearing this, but suicidal people are irrational people. That's why they choose suicide.

What I don't get here is why you appear to be so adamantly opposed to the notion that men have a more difficult time getting support for specific grievances (eg, being a battered spouse) than women do. So far you've attempted to write off each detailed incident of the difficulties faced by men in those situations as isolated, irrelevant, or irrational.

Is it the result of some vast conspiracy designed to keep men in abusive relationships? Of course not. It's a conflux of cultural factors, ranging from denial that men are battered, to the notion that men should be able to handle it themselves, to an irrational shame felt by battered men, to, quite frankly, people like you who seem to think the difficulties in establishing support structures for men are imaginary.

 

[Jack Action]

The sad part is (at least in the case of my ex) these nice guys probably actually are very nice. He never lashed out at me when we were together, he was always thoughtful and considerate of my feelings and he was so in tune to them that even when something was wrong and I didn't say anything, he still knew I was hurting and he would do little things to try and make me feel better. If he only had a little confidence, he would have been perfect, unfortunately that's something I couldn't give him and in the end he chose to blame the world for his misfortune and wallow in his own misery, rather than push himself beyond his problems.

Like, I don't know your ex and I'm only speaking personal experience and all, but I really have seen a lot of "nice guys" who seem legitimately hostile and often completely unaware of themselves. And sometimes outright scary. Like, Isla Vista shooter scary.

Obviously, not everyone or anything like that, but I've long had the feeling that "nice guy" is, quite often, a justification, like when people do something horrible and tell themselves they're a good person.

Wait, justification for what, being hostile and creepy to everyone?

 

[Eclipse Dragon]

I think it hearkens back to the misconception that women like jerks, which is not true. Confidence is attractive

Going off on a bit of a tangent but here's another "societal conditioning" thing. Men are expected to be forward and confident or they're viewed as lesser. Not "allowed" to be shy. But shyness in a girl is frequently presented as cute and endearing.

Sorry for hijacking your post and I understand you weren't intending to permeate a damaging expectation but I really, really dislike the whole stereotyped 'requirements' for men and women.

Hmm, I follow a different definition of confidence, which doesn't necessarily go with "forward" (in the social sense) I believe that a shy guy can be "confident" as well. I'm not talking about someone who walks into a room and dominates, I'm referring more to someone who has faith in their own abilities.

But I understand where you're coming from and I didn't mean to perpetuate a stereotype, I apologize.

 

[Lightspeaker]

I think it hearkens back to the misconception that women like jerks, which is not true. Confidence is attractive

Going off on a bit of a tangent but here's another "societal conditioning" thing. Men are expected to be forward and confident or they're viewed as lesser. Not "allowed" to be shy. But shyness in a girl is frequently presented as cute and endearing.

Sorry for hijacking your post and I understand you weren't intending to permeate a damaging expectation but I really, really dislike the whole stereotyped 'requirements' for men and women.

Hmm, I follow a different definition of confidence, which doesn't necessarily go with "forward" (in the social sense) I believe that a shy guy can be "confident" as well. I'm not talking about someone who walks into a room and dominates, I'm referring more to someone who has faith in their own abilities.

But I understand where you're coming from and I didn't mean to perpetuate a stereotype, I apologize.

Its nothing to apologise for and its not your fault its just...well...its just a thing that gets me a little. >_>

 

[Something Amyss]

That whole Isla Vista thing, I don't think that most creepy loners go that way, but when a creepy loner does notice how nobody is shocked?

Eh, as long as there's some quick easy reason behind it. Loner/muslim/gamer/listens to music/whatever. As long as it's not one of us doing it, it's not a worry.

But I am a Muslim loner music listening gamer!

 

[Raesvelg]

You have a hard time with that, because I'm not opposed to that notion as much as I am to the idea that the lack of male-only facilities is the result of a lack of the same degree of male-only effort equivalent to what women put forward for their exclusive, private services. Women didn't whine or demand them into existence, they made them, often in direct opposition to society at large.

...

You're not opposed to the notion that men have more difficulty establishing support structures, you're opposed to the notion that men aren't putting forth the the same amount of effort? I'm assuming you made some terrible grammatical error here, so I'll address your point as if you meant to say "as much as I am in support of the idea that...", because to read it as you wrote it is pretty much nonsensical.

Odd that, in face of things like the Violence Against Women Act, you can make the statement that women didn't "whine or demand" things into existence.

That's how support structures are granted government or large-scale private funding, by complaining to people and making demands and having them listen to you, and that seems to be the difficulty that men attempting the same task are having.

You're trying to write it off as "men aren't trying as hard" while completely ignoring any evidence to suggest that in this case, men simply have a much higher barrier to surmount, while now stating that any attempt to drum up public support for such structures is "whining".

 

[EvilRoy]

I'm not dismissing you out of hand. I don't know you, know anything about you, or care about you. I'm dismissing the idea that someone starving to death is at the same level of happiness as someone in the first world, with social issues.

You can keep trying to spin this as something more, but it's a dud Roy.

Yeah, see that's the other thing. In addition to trying to establish intellectual dominance, you also have a habit of applying convenient motives to others, in an effort to presumably continue the dominance ritual you have going on. Referring to me by 'name' is also kind of interesting, Councillor.

As it stands, however, you pretty clearly dismissed the entire concept of the hedonistic treadmill out of hand in your original response, where you referred to his statement as a series of assumptions and generalizations designed to ease the guilty conscience. There is no reason to believe the standard 'starving african child' statement is any more than hyperbole used to indicate the vastness of difference such a concept could reasonably explain - and yet you have attached yourself to this so unreasonably firmly that one could not possibly talk to you without addressing it, apparently.

 

[Vanilla_Knight]

Feminists: "Women are being raped because of rape culture that permeates throughout this patriarchal society in the western world. Men are instilled with the value that treating women like sex objects only for their pleasure is part of being a man. Toxic masculinity ruins the lives of minorities, women, and other marginalized groups, as well as men who are also victims of the patriarchal paradigm."

Non-feminist men: "No such thing as rape culture in the west, rape is universally condemned. No such thing as toxic masculinity. Ascribing blame to one sex and using gendered terms for the ills of society makes you come across as a sexist bigot, no one would do this with black people without being called a racist by the general populace. Men are not taught that treating women like sexual objects is good, and you feminists have a track record of conflating what would be considered normal heterosexual attraction of men to women as "sexual objectification" so your usage of those words holds little weight."

Feminists: "Ugh, how dare you deny rape culture and WOMEN'S issues!"

Non-feminist men: "Rape is not a problem exclusive to women. Men are raped too."

Feminists: "Yeah, by other men!"

Non-feminist men: "It is possible for a man to be raped or sexually abused by a woman. Domestic violence also shares this possibility, and there is evidence to suggest that men and women share a near equal amount of perpetration and reception of abuse in domestic violence."

Feminists: "Wow, isn't it funny that male problems only ever come up as a counter-argument?!"

Non-feminist men: "It doesn't "ever only come up as a counter-argument" people have argued it for years. Though isn't it funny how decades upon decades of feminist advocacy has shaped societal perception to where men are the abusers and women are the victims? That this has been ingrained in law and law enforcement practices when responding to domestic violence disputes? And now, when that argument falls apart the discussion has shifted into how "the patriarchy" harms men too? That it's apparently always harmed men as well as placed them above women. And instead of speaking out against the many outrageous injustices women face in other parts of the world such as genital mutilation or being barred from education, you have chosen to campaign against a self-induced delusion about rape-culture and 'the problems with masculinity'in western liberal societies."

Feminists: "This is what men's rights looks like. Good luck getting laid when you treat women like shit and trivialize their very real problems. This is clearly a case of the fallacy of relative-privation. Just because women in other countries can be killed for being raped, doesn't mean that patriarchal rape culture in America isn't a problem. Men need to be told not to rape."

Non-feminist men: "You are right. I've seen the light. How can we solve this patriarchal plight?"

Feminist: "Rhyming? Are you trying to be funny? We're talking about serious issues! I should have expected as much from an MRA."

Non-feminist men: "I'm not an MRA and I don't find first world feminists taking up arms over a video game character wearing a bikini to be all that funny as much as it is stupid."

Feminist: "Women wearing bikinis in video games reinforces the idea that women are sex objects! It affects the perception of men about real life women!"

Non-feminist men: "Sure..."

I tried to used enough buzzwords that it was accurate but not enough so that it was esoteric. 8/10 maybe?

 

[Rex Fallout]

Life isn't perfect. It will never be perfect.

To quote a very influential man in my life:
"Life sucks. And then you die."

Most men (and women for that matter) just deal with it.

 

[sky14kemea]

You guys suck at staying on topic. You make all thread OPs sad.