The majority of correspondents to this forum have attempted to reflect upon what it means to be a man - by its nature this is a very subjective, unquantifiable process. When one takes a look at oneself no doubt there is the discovery of both good and bad qualities. For myself, this has meant looking at loss of control and gaining a new self respect when I have managed to deal with life issues such as divorce.

I know I much prefer being a man to coping as a woman - I can't imagine what it is like to have a period every month. I have noticed in the course of my work that when partnered with a female officer, the public will generally look to me first rather than my female partner for direction, whether or not I am the most knowledgeable. Men are often given respect without having to earn it, whereas women have to prove themselves over and over again. I am not judged by my appearance as much as women are.

As human beings, as men and women we each have our weaknesses and strengths, yet for some in this forum it appears that asking what it means to be a man has turned into a competition about who is the worst sex. A futile and pointless excercise which achieves nothing and is a very sad indictment on those who pursue it.

To those who have contributed thoughtfully to this discussion I thank you. To those who demand a level of proof limited by their own self imposed restrictions I can only feel sadness for your alienation.

Ambo,

Don’t thank us – thank you ;-)

“I have noticed in the course of my work that when partnered with a female officer, the public will generally look to me first rather than my female partner for direction, whether or not I am the most knowledgeable.”

Could this bias be caused by men who preceded you? You know the ones – the ones with solutions. Perhaps interaction with the public in your line of work as an Ambo, is not one that requires “relating” so much, for otherwise they would have surely dialled a non-000 number.

Seeker, THANK YOU, for illustrating Ambo's point so succintly

"turned into a competition about who is the worst sex. A futile and pointless excercise which achieves nothing and is a very sad indictment on those who pursue it."

Ambo,

“To those who demand a level of proof limited by their own self imposed restrictions I can only feel sadness for your alienation.”

The article is not on “one” man, it is on men in general, and that is the objection to these types of articles that can so easily stereotype and lead to “mythconceptions”.

There have also been many tax payer’s funded university courses run on the subject of “gender”, and maybe the pinnacle of all that would be Dr Michael Flood’s list of slogans about men and women that I have been quoting from (and which he deems suitable for banners and graffiti).

So before labelling me names or making inferences about self imposed restrictions etc could you please find me the information about the male and female gender, that is not generalised, stereotyped, anecdotal, myth, half-truths, or just plain “made up”.

If you can’t easily find that information, then maybe you have a complaint with the media and with Social Science.

While there " many tax payer’s (sic) funded university courses run on the subject of “gender" ", clearly "Timkins" hasn't attended any of them. If he had, he may have learnt to distinguish between valid social research and the 'men's rights' propaganda that he loves to quote. He might even have learnt how to find "the information about the male and female gender, that is not generalised, stereotyped, anecdotal, myth, half-truths, or just plain “made up” " for himself, rather than repeatedly bleating for the rest of us to do it for him.

Timkins, the nicest thing anyone reading your posts could describe you as is a .....Virgo.