The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > If all men are monsters, how should we raise our boys? > Comments

If all men are monsters, how should we raise our boys? : Comments

By Peter West, published 9/7/2012

When I asked about books on men in one Sydney bookshop the reply was 'Oh God, I don't know. Try under mental illness or self-help'.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
'But why do we expect men to look after their health if they are always told that society doesn't value them?'

Well, if they don't want to look after their health, that's their prerogative. And as for being told that their society doesn't value them (which is rubbish, but for the sake of argument), just refer them to about a million global facts and figures that prove beyond any doubt that men are valued far more than women in every field of human existence - financially, economically, culturally, politically, personally and physically.
Posted by Killarney, Monday, 9 July 2012 8:59:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Im left only to ask with ironic intent,

'How could a man write an article containing such good and well-founded common sense?'

It would seem, from the comment regarding mathematicians, some feminists also hold mathemtics in contempt ... which of course is quite a logical position for a feminist and totally illogical if you are a man.

viva la differed!
Posted by imajulianutter, Monday, 9 July 2012 9:12:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Peter a truly great article about a subject which needs much more debate.
Killarney, what you say is true. How ever, look in any primary school class room, it's all girls this girls that. Nothing about what boys are good for. Boys have basically created the world to which we live. For better or worse. Pick up any history book and it's mostly about what boys have done. Yet since the feminist movement of the seventies there has been an increasing hammering of boys. Also there is a marked increase in single parent families. Boys, especially, young boys, need to be told that there valued. Not only girls. They both have the same needs. The battle of the sexes was created by women as adults (arguably), lets keep the children out of it.
We are people after all, the sex should not come into it. Only one's ability. Don't encourage girls into science. Encourage people into science. That way the best people will be pushing our sciences. The people will bring there individual talents with them. We need to unite as a species to survive, not squabble between the sexes like misinformed ignorami.
Posted by JustGiveMeALLTheFacts, Monday, 9 July 2012 3:21:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Peter is it by accident that you promote a third gender, when you separate people in the media from men & women. You are right of course, to separate these media people with the least justified high opinion of themselves from the rest of humanity. The rest of us don't deserve to be condemned by association with this separate gender.

It is fortunate indeed that most men are strong enough to continue supporting the weight of society, while deflecting the barbs of the feminists.

Actually I find that most real women can ignore the rabid feminists & their tripe, like water of a ducks back. If ever it becomes otherwise, women & society would be in deep trouble.
Posted by Hasbeen, Monday, 9 July 2012 5:45:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thankfully the current crop of Pollies in power have shown what happens when feminism rules. Incompetence and diaster! The emasculated head nodders have no shame. Bring on the election.
Posted by runner, Monday, 9 July 2012 9:22:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Interestingly the Italian father who is fighting for access to his children said that the family courts in Australia were biased against men and he talked about how the media paint him as some sort of monster.
Posted by JamesH, Tuesday, 10 July 2012 8:35:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As a general reply to the comments above, the problem is not that men and boys are undervalued, it's that they are OVERvalued. It's this overvaluation of boys and men in every sphere of life that is preventing them from questioning and challenging the biological and social expectations that society demands of them. In the end, men know that to challenge their conditioning might very well mean their loss of power and privilege - a position they know they never really deserved in the first place.

Deep down, men also know that for many centuries they have been overworked, exploited, cut off from their emotions, alienated from their children and sent to fight history's wars. They know they have been programmed to violence rather than co-operation, competition rather than partnership. More than anything, they know they have been taught to feel superior to women - and all the relationship dysfunction that brings.

Of course, after a lifetime of being overvalued simply for being born a certain gender, most men don't like any system that shines the spotlight away from them and onto women, even for a second. Little wonder that forums like this are full of cognitive distortions of reality into scenarios about women taking over the world.
Posted by Killarney, Tuesday, 10 July 2012 8:38:26 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"just refer them to about a million global facts and figures that prove beyond any doubt that men are valued far more than women in every field of human existence - financially, economically, culturally, politically, personally and physically."

Either it's not that simple or men are not getting the message.

"In 2009, a total of 1633 males and 499 females died by suicide, representing an incidence rate of 14.9 in every 100,000 men and 4.5 in every 100,000 women." http://www.responseability.org/site/index.cfm?display=134569

Those figures don't necessarily cover all suicides, there are difficulties in separating suicide from accident in traffic incidents http://www.monash.edu.au/miri/research/reports/muarc216.pdf and research into that appears to be limited. From finish studies mention in that article "One study found that 95% of traffic suicide victims were male [41], while another found 90% were male"

Men are valued when they are successful but the message is all to often that we are not valued for who we are but for what we can achieve or provide for others.

I agree with Hasbeen that most men and women manage to ignore the extremists in our day to day lives however the subtext of men being disposable has found it's way into legislation where it can have a massive impact. It's not often stated overtly but rather forms the backdrop to the way family law and child support is done.

Feminism has brought some good changes for both men and women however there is an element that wants to play gender wars and has no interest in better outcomes for all.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Tuesday, 10 July 2012 9:05:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
R0bert

Exact statistics vary, but all studies on depression and suicide show that, while men outnumber women in suicide deaths, women considerably outnumber men in suicide attempts and suffer depression in far greater numbers.

'Feminism has brought some good changes for both men and women however there is an element that wants to play gender wars and has no interest in better outcomes for all.'

Feminists are fighting for gender equality. It's men who are fighting the 'gender wars', because adversarial conflict and combat are what men are brought up to do best. If men wanted 'better outcomes for all', they wouldn't inject so much of their energy into fighting feminism and, instead, take a long hard look at why they keep defending and maintaining the very attitudes and behaviours that make their lives dysfunctional - and short.
Posted by Killarney, Tuesday, 10 July 2012 1:20:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"while men outnumber women in suicide deaths, women considerably outnumber men in suicide attempts and suffer depression in far greater numbers"

Interesting take on the stats "while men outnumber women in suicide deaths, women considerably outnumber men in suicide attempts and suffer depression in far greater numbers"

From one of the documents I linked to earlier http://www.responseability.org/site/index.cfm?display=134569
"0.3% of men and 0.5% of women (0.4% of the sample overall) reported that they had made a suicide attempt in the previous 12-month period."
More than 3 times the rate of actual suicides (14.9 in every 100,000 men and 4.5 in every 100,000 women.) is outnumbering whilst less than double the rate of reported suicide attempts (0.3% of men and 0.5% of women ) is "considerably outnumber" - or do you have a source that you forgot to refer to.

The sources I could find suggest that women are around twice as likely to be diagnosed with depression as men. Not exhaustive but the twice the rate seemed to be across a number of sites http://depression.about.com/od/forwomen/f/prevalence.htm

I suspect that a significant factor in the difference in attempted suicide and depression rates is that men are expected to tough it out.

A cry for help (differentiated from a failed suicide attempt) is something that's likely to get a man looked down on rather than supported.

Depression has some of the same issues. The background subtext about expectations for coping are very different for men and women and that will impact on the rates that people are identified in relation to attempted suicide and depression.

As for the rest that's about your own issues rather than any real reflection of the world most of us live in.

There are men like that but most are not, we have not experienced the privileges of power and rank, rather we've grown up with an expectation of sacrifice for our families.

In the same way most women have sacrificed for their families and as with men a proportion abuse those relationships for personal gain at the others expense.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Tuesday, 10 July 2012 5:18:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Killarney,
You're stereotyping and "othering" the author and Men in general, if you can't understand why men feel the way they do it's probably because you're a woman or a man who is uncomfortable with how it feels to be a real man.
And by "real man" I mean a person who's comfortable with his masculinity, be he Gay or Straight, homosexuality of course is an aspect of masculinity, in many cases even a sort of "hyper masculinity", for want of a better term.
Women and Feminists are pretty good at telling us about why they oppose masculinity and maleness but they display no insight into the thinking or feelings of their subjects.
If I'd used the language in your posts to argue against the claims of any other identifiable group in society I'd expect to be pilloried in this forum.
Let's cut to the chase, you're not talking about all Men, you're promoting a racial thesis without using the "R" word because you're surely not talking about Aboriginal, Asian or other non white Male privilege. You seem to be under the delusion that we White men are somehow able to override the entire political and legal structure of this society and promote our own interests ahead of all others.
Name one group which openly and publicly promotes White male privilege as it's main focus of activism.
Name one group which publicly promotes White men's RIGHTS much less their advancement.
There are none.
There is no right I can assert nor entitlement I can redeem based on my race or my gender, can the same be said of women? Or Aboriginals? Or Sudanese?
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Tuesday, 10 July 2012 6:14:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I felt annoyed and frustrated reading this very one-sided view on how all women think all men are monsters.

Lol!
Most women I know actually like the men and boys in their lives, and most women are well aware there are good and bad men in this world, just as there are good and bad women.

For goodness sake get over yourself Peter.
Such a pessimistic view of half the population (females) is a very unhealthy way of thinking.
Surely you can think of even a few women who aren't into male-bashing?

At least the last paragraph in this article was at more helpful and a little more positive in his suggestions as to how we should be raising our sons.
To my mind, most of us ARE raising our sons well already...by both mums and dads.
Posted by Suseonline, Wednesday, 11 July 2012 12:55:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To understanding Killarney's rage and so-called moral superiority we have to understand the particular ontological and moral perspective he/she's using. It's a Foucauldian/neo-Marxian ontology that views the world as nothing but "power relations" that encompasses "oppressors and the oppressed." By reducing a complex world to the simple distinction of male as oppressor and female as oppressed in a power struggle initiated and sustained by the 'evil' male, he/she then can claim moral superiority because he/she dislikes uneven power and wants "equality." "Equality" today has the good conscience on its side, whereas converse beliefs are shamed.

To view the world as a power struggle between man and women is to fall into the trap of the Foucauldian/neo-Marxian/3rd wave feminists. They have already set the parameters of debate; they have set the contours of how the world is constituted and what ought to be discussed in this constitution. Hence, to engage with them on their own terms is to already lose the debate.

We ought to bare in mind that the world as a pure power struggle doesn't reach much further back than Nietzsche (as it was him who formulated the view that "the world is will to power and nothing besides"). So, to interpret history through this lens would be to distort history because it doesn't grasp the varying moral perspectives employed at different times throughout history, and why they were instituted.

A proper understanding of history requires sharp, astute, scholarly work that gets inside the feel and norms of each epoch.

Today, we have the unfortunate problem of being stuck in an ontological paradigm that views ourselves as beings who desire nothing more than power. The goal for the future is to change the ontological lens and the raging, pessimistic Killarney types will fade out and be viewed as 'dinosaurs.'
Posted by Aristocrat, Wednesday, 11 July 2012 4:34:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks, Aristocrat, that explains a lot.

Like the Marxists and the Fascists, ideologues always need to define the good guys (themselves) against the enemy.

The bourgeoisie, whoever... or men??

And then try to incite rage against the enemy.

Strange way of seeing the world, some might think.................
Posted by Bronte, Wednesday, 11 July 2012 5:21:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Killarneys post confirms my thesis that feminism is actually all about men; What they are like, why they do what they do, why they don't do what they don't do, what they should be doing. It's counter-intuitive becuase you'd think it would be about women, but it isn't anything about women. In a way feminists are 'experts' on men, and really don't analyse women or their behaviour at all.

When was the last feminist article you read that was about women? The actions of women, where they lead, what other actions they may have taken, the psychology of women? Nope, it's always an analysis of men, and an attempt to assign motive to male behaviour.

You see, the feminist is an expert on the motives behind all male behaviour.

It goes without saying we are a singular entity.

Even articles that make an attempt to be about women, they are only about women in comparison to men, or how men's actions have affected women negitively, or how women percieve men's actions, and how that perception defines men's motives better than asking any of the actual men involved.

Of course to discuss women, their motives and psychology, would more likely involve some discussion of personal responsibility and agency.

And of course in discussing male behaviour, the enduring cliche of the 1950s male good little provider, abusive alcoholic, stunted emotional intelligence, distant authoritative parent and Mad Men type sexist outlook is the only game in town.

Or maybe I just live on a different planet to Killarney, with my mates and our hen-pecked fathers that expose a lie of that feminist 50s cliche, our well functioning relationships full of empathy and teamwork and mutual respect, our shared provider and carer roles negotiated quite easily and amicably, our happy lives and happy wives.
Posted by Houellebecq, Wednesday, 11 July 2012 5:25:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Beautiful Houllebeq,
I was kicking myself for not pointing out the Feminist's lack of empathy for Men.
We can all empathise with women who are entangled with bad men and as a society we try to treat them sympathetically but what about Men who are involved with bad women?
In the U.S there's presently a storm of hatred flying between Feminists and Men's rights advocates over the issue of male rape.
Recent surveys show that when rapes committed against men in prison are added to the statistics for the wider community the incidence of male-male rape slightly exceeds that of male-female offending. The adjusted figures showed a higher incidence of male -male offending mainly due to the repetitive and sustained nature of sexual assaults and long term, non consensual sexual servitude (punking) in male prisons where vulnerable men and boys are passed around between abusers and often gang raped for months on end.
There's a poster being circulated which has an image of a young man on one side with the caption "Would you joke about this man being raped", the next image shows him in prison orange and is headed "What about now?".
You can imagine the reaction in the Feminist blogosphere, "explosive hate fueled ranting" about covers it.
Similarly the debate over male circumcision in Germany has taken a nasty turn with a prominent Women's group opposing any ban on the grounds that in promotes the idea that male and female circumcision are in any way comparable.
There's never any empathy just this explosion of indignation, there's no sense of fair play, that two completely separate issues need to be taken equally seriously, it's just "How dare they say more men are raped than women!", "How dare they outlaw male circumcision and potentially lower the public indignation over female circumcision!".
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 11 July 2012 6:27:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
>>It goes without saying we are a singular entity.<<

Quite right. One of the reasons there is such a gulf of difference between men and women is that women have individual and distinct consciousnesses whilst men operate as a collective hive-mind much like the Borg from Star Trek. When Killarney says "It's men who are fighting the 'gender wars', because adversarial conflict and combat are what men are brought up to do best" she isn't just making a sweeping generalisation which reduces men to stereotypes and caricatures: they really all have been brought up as warriors.

Obviously this leaves a third gender: those of us who have XY sex chromosomes and the sexual characteristics of men but are combat-shy cowards and/or pacifists. People - definitely not men - like Mahatma Gandhi, Dr. Benjamin Franklin 'Hawkeye' Pierce, John Lennon, Arnold J. Rimmer. And me of course: I have a yellow streak that would make a Frenchman envious.

Because we lack the attitude to be considered men and the biology to be considered women we are constantly overlooked and ignored in this debate. It's like we just don't exist. Feminists are only interested in a dialogue about men and women and this simplistic dichotomy automatically marginalizes and disenfranchises an entire gender... while feminists claim to be fighting for gender equality!

And if you think that doesn't hurt Killarney try walking a mile in a not-man's boots.

Cheers,

Tony
Posted by Tony Lavis, Wednesday, 11 July 2012 6:39:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'Similarly the debate over male circumcision in Germany has taken a nasty turn with a prominent Women's group opposing any ban on the grounds that in promotes the idea that male and female circumcision are in any way comparable.'

LMFAO!

Is that true?

I read yesterday someone saying it's offensive to compare the foreskin to the labia. I reckon they're about the same function (The outer labia I'm talking about), and they even use the skin for sex changes and such.

FGM is plainly worse since it involves the clitoris and inner labia I too, but if it was just the outer labia I reckon there would still be the uproar and double standard.

I find it amusing people defend circumcision on cultural grounds when that is considered irrelevant when it comes to FGM. It's always amusing when people pick and choose what parts of other cultures must be respected and protected.
Posted by Houellebecq, Wednesday, 11 July 2012 6:44:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yeah it's true, the person quoted in the article I read was Katrin Altpeter, social minister of Baden Wurttemburg and the context of her statement was in support of an outcry by unnamed "Women's Groups".
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 11 July 2012 9:24:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy