Ok, so maybe they don’t just suddenly fly off the handle for literally no reason. But the “reason” is often due to some perceived slight or transgression that the man doesn’t understand or maybe isn’t even aware of.
Basically it’s all variations of the “take my wife please” joke.
Please, he more than once did. The entire argument was that women were angry because men weren’t “doing it right”. This is entirely about the male stereotype of being filthy barbarians.
Not sure I can even endorse the “often” there, but sure one partner may not understand or be aware of what the other partner is upset over. And men and women are definitely socialized to emote differently.
Another bit to throw out - women who experienced childhood trauma, inclusive of sexual, physical, and verbal abuse, may be “hypervigilant” as adults - a heightened awareness of potential threat and a tendency to interpret others actions as threats, a relatively chronic “fight or flight” state. Women experience those sorts childhood trauma more than men do.
But even when the “flying off the handle” is secondary to a hypervigilant misread of a benign statement or action as threats, it is not for no reason.
Taking into account all forms of abuse and neglect, this is true. However, child sexual abuse victims are disproportionately though not overwhelmingly girls: about 1 in 4 girls vs. about 1 in 13 boys. I can’t say what effect that imbalance may have on hypervigilance behavior in adults.
Figures can be debated (reported may not reflect all true cases) but standard is five times more sexual abuse of girls than boys, a staggering at least one in four girls.
You are correct that I overstated by including all abuse types; for others rates are more similar.
First, a general note to the thread. While I feel this thread serves a useful purpose, it’s gone far from the OP’s comments on how painting one gender or other other as “the problem” is itself making the situation worse. @Spice_Weasel’s OP was about not just identifying problems, but about trying to find a positive model for male behavior.
Given the topic, some drift about what is considered positive vs. toxic male behavior was inevitable, and as a whole, the GD moderators have tried to let the conversation flow as much as possible, except when people went beyond the bounds of GD and into direct attacks, which brings us to the present.
Right now, we’ve had multiple petty snipes at other posters, with @msmith537 and especially @Der_Trihs standing out lately, though other posters have been moderated on such earlier in the thread.
This is a formal instruction to the thread to end the attacks on fellow posters - this is Great Debates, and as always attack the post’s content, don’t attack the poster. Especially, do NOT put words in the mouth of another poster or imply such, including examples like this:
Seriously, dial it back. For posters who have repeated such tactics, the next step will be formal warnings and/or a thread ban, and eventually followed by a closing of the thread, which would only be re-opened in the Pit if the OP requests such.
I’m going to disagree here. The point is that often the only female characters are there to motivate male characters. Redshirts of either sex are a feature of fiction that is not especially sexist. But the role of the people who are characters tends to be sexist and favors men.
There are a variety of modes of child sexual abuse. But a friend who served grand jury duty several years ago said that the crimes they issued indictments for were mostly drunk driving, followed by a disturbing number of cases of boys who were abused. Mostly boys who didn’t live with their father, and mostly boys who were a little socially out of it.
But i believe that sexual abuse of boys is a common problem.
To get back to the topic of male inequity, i think boys and men who attempt to report sexual abuse are even less likely than women to be believed and to get a sympathetic hearing.
I think it is not in dispute that in our male dominated society we are more protective of women (in some ways) and are/have been less likely to allow them to participate in risky activities (childbirth a not insignificant exception). And that that is reflected in media.
It doesn’t necessarily follow, however, that this is evidence of sexism towards men. Particularly because it is primarily men who are making these choices.
I absolutely believe that men suffer in our gender-focused patriarchy (which is maintained and enforced by both men and women). And I agree that we are more tolerant on the large scale of men getting ground up in battle and at the workplace than we are of women- partly because men are “default”, but also because that’s the particular role imposed upon their gender. Work in the mines and wreck your body to support your family. This, however, does not exist in opposition to the observation that women are seen as disposable, but alongside it. We are all disposable in different contexts, and society goes along with it, if we are fulfilling expected roles. My take is that we enjoy portraying women as significant victims in our art because it allows the men to rise to the role of the heroic defender. Men use women’s suffering to inspire a sense of purpose.
What would be such evidence, then? Is it necessary to prove sexist intent? The Bechdel Test is taken as valid on its face. The sheer number of movies which fail it is all the evidence we need of sexism. Why should the disproportionate deaths of male redshirts be any different?
That’s pretty much my point. Societal tropes and expectations that disadvantage men aren’t the same as those that disadvantage women, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t any. My hope, and you may call me naive if you wish, is that searching for attitudes that are analogous between the genders should give us more empathy for each other. Admitting that there are sexist attitudes against men doesn’t excuse or diminish those that confront women.