To find it hard to care about men's issues

This is a fantastic, level headed, non hysterical post
well done

There are countless number of issues in the world. As the quote goes - the good thing about everything being so fucked up is that no matter where you look, there is great work to do. I do think those working in this, and many other areas, are admirable. That doesn't mean we need to be part of it - I don't think any person can actually care about all of them and it'll only harm us if we try.

It's not unreasonable to put your energy and care where you want to - especially as the source for being to care is your brother who reads like he's just dumping onto you rather than looking for solutions or really any support. As many said, it would be very different if it was a son who had been harmed and was looking for guidance and help.

I think it's better when people focus their efforts in the areas for the causes that matter to them rather than trying to cover everything. I don't think it helps when people are either pushed to try to cover everything. I also don't think there is a need to be antagonistic towards causes even if we don't care about them. While it may feel good, there is little benefit in treating others who care about a different cause as if they're taking away from one's own.

I view it like this - I don't really care about issues in my birth country, I left over twenty years ago, the writing was on the wall there well before then, I know others who left who are doing great work to help out.. I'm not going to shite on those who do, I'm not going to point out to them that the country has caused a lot of its own problems as they're very aware and we're all very aware that the ones suffering the most are the ones with the least power with little involvement in making the problems that are currently harming them - I don't have to care or get involved, I might change my mind later, but I'm not going to be guilted into doing so, and I can still see that the work is there and I'm glad others are trying to find out what can be done to make the world better in that way while I try in other ways. I can understand everyone has suffering in their lives without feeling the need to be the one to try to fix it or even to get emotionally involved in it. I'll only spread myself too thin and drain myself to be of any good to anyone.

This is one of his arguments but is this actually true? Who is teaching them that? While we expect better from our kids than the last generation, mums are not all misandrists passing this on to their toddlers or teens.

Just like mums are not all misogynists teaching their sons that girls are just there to take care of them, not all mums are misandrists telling their sons they are bad for being boys - it's not all on mums. Cultural learning comes from many angles and sometimes just from the attitudes in the environment.

I was once at a school doing a focus group discussion on safeguarding, and as part of the discussion, one Y9 boy nervously spoke up that everything to do with wellbeing at the school was aimed at girls, that he felt that there was an attitude that boys are just a problem that need to sort themselves out or at most, that they should sort it out through football - and not all of them like football. All 12 student - even split evenly between girls and boys - adamantly agreed that this was an issue. It was one of the best conversations we had with the kids came from that as we dug into what they thought was needed and the issues between the sexes in the school, including that a lot of sexual harassment going on was more same-sex harassment, particularly girls on other girls, but also boy on boy, but that it was getting ignored.

This was discussed with the Safeguarding Lead who made all the right noises - and turned around and made 2 more wellbeing groups for girls.

A couple years on, same school, struggling with boys doing far less well than girls and struggling with engagement. Their only group that was wellbeing focused that boys could access was still only the weekly mixed sex football lunch club, with occasional half-terms with a boxing coach that was invite only. I was aware of girls having been given permission to change in the disabled toilet rather than in the girls' locker room as a way around the harassment going on, but still no changes in the policy or in how it was being documented (it was documented as bullying, only boy on girl was documented as sexual harassment). The kids literally gave them a blueprint and they ignored it. I can only guess as to the reasons for that.

I've also heard 8-10 year old boys include in their description of men "they just want to hurt girls and women". It's getting there fairly young.

I imagine both sexes have a sense of whether they are a good person or a bit of a shit bag.

Some of the worst people in the world think they are great. I personally think no person is objective enough to know that there are a good person, it's something only others can determine, and I view anyone who says they are a good person with immediate suspicion as IME they tend to excuse any shite they do with their supposedly good intent rather than care about the impact.

I suppose most won't care until men's issues happens to their son's.

Honestly I'm fed up with the general lack of compassion in society today. Everything seems to be battle lines of this against that.

Could you link to those surveys please?

Specifically on the claim about lesbian DV : this usually comes from the CDC survey which is US anyway and might not apply to other countries. This survey counted lifetime DV prevalence, but did not record perpetrator sex. Many lesbians have been in prior relationships with men. Surveys which DO record perpetrator sex tend to have roughly equal DV to hetero couples

I think there are plenty of toxic behaviours that women are over-represented in. But I don’t think any of them come close to the levels of harm of wanton and murderous violence, which is overwhelmingly a man thing.

Interesting question about under what hypotheticals women might be worse.

I think if the physical strength advantage were reversed then the numbers might even up a bit. I think I’ve seen studies that say that the rate of domestic violence in lesbian relationships is high, for example. But I think there are also evolutionary drivers of why men are so much more violent than women (especially at the extreme tail) which stems from the different biological reproductive roles. Crudely put: at an individual level very violent men can have a lot of descendants by force. And at a societal level men are more disposable than women for maintaining a population, so having a portion of them be extreme risk-takers makes sense as an evolutionary strategy in a way that having extreme-risk-taking women never could.

Yes - women apparently tend to choose less lethal methods (eg overdose). Some people say it’s because women consider who will find the body, misogynists say it’s because women are just attention seeking. As has been implied in this thread actually.

Pretty sure that’s not true.But happy to have a look at your evidence.

It's women who buy into the chivalry though isn't it! Most women love the whole ladies first thing.

if that is true, it’s another reason the patriarchy is bad for men too! It’s not feminists who made up these ridiculous rules of chivalry.

Men are expected to let women and children go first in an emergency. You only have to see the small boat threads to see that when a woman dies but the men all make it there is outrage one of them didn't give up his spot for her or make sure she survived at their expense there is outrage.

I doubt a feminist would pipe up with "no! I deserve to die as an equal!"

@GaIadrielmost people wouldn’t risk their lives for any other person-and fortunately very few of us are ever called upon to. It seems a pretty strange metric to judge feminists by!

Just clarifying this - women attempt suicide more than men, it's just that men (who attempt it less) are more likely to die?

I voted YABU because what your brother says is not completely without merit and for all our sakes I hope men and women manage to restrike a new balance applicable to the times. I don't think the world needs more male style energy due to women mimicking so called male behaviours and attitudes in order to get ahead. We need Yin and Yang, equal but different. Men as a generalisation are not biologically hard wired to nurture whereas women as a generalisation are hard wired to be able to nurture, provide and protect. We rock, so to speak, lol. But I do feel for the young and upcoming men too.

Why is he your DP?

I think this is the problem..women choose the worst men and then think that their sex is what makes them bad and that all men are like the awful man you chose. You then think is is justified to fail to show humanity and compassion towards any of that sex because you hitched yourself to awful men. It is incel like behaviour.

If you have been so harmed that you can no longer feel human emotions towards other people, you need to be kept away from others and in therapy. You shouldnt be having relationships and definitely not raising or educating boys. You are a danger to them.

There are countless number of issues in the world. As the quote goes - the good thing about everything being so fucked up is that no matter where you look, there is great work to do. I do think those working in this, and many other areas, are admirable. That doesn't mean we need to be part of it - I don't think any person can actually care about all of them and it'll only harm us if we try.

It's not unreasonable to put your energy and care where you want to - especially as the source for being to care is your brother who reads like he's just dumping onto you rather than looking for solutions or really any support. As many said, it would be very different if it was a son who had been harmed and was looking for guidance and help.

I think it's better when people focus their efforts in the areas for the causes that matter to them rather than trying to cover everything. I don't think it helps when people are either pushed to try to cover everything. I also don't think there is a need to be antagonistic towards causes even if we don't care about them. While it may feel good, there is little benefit in treating others who care about a different cause as if they're taking away from one's own.

I view it like this - I don't really care about issues in my birth country, I left over twenty years ago, the writing was on the wall there well before then, I know others who left who are doing great work to help out.. I'm not going to shite on those who do, I'm not going to point out to them that the country has caused a lot of its own problems as they're very aware and we're all very aware that the ones suffering the most are the ones with the least power with little involvement in making the problems that are currently harming them - I don't have to care or get involved, I might change my mind later, but I'm not going to be guilted into doing so, and I can still see that the work is there and I'm glad others are trying to find out what can be done to make the world better in that way while I try in other ways. I can understand everyone has suffering in their lives without feeling the need to be the one to try to fix it or even to get emotionally involved in it. I'll only spread myself too thin and drain myself to be of any good to anyone.

This is one of his arguments but is this actually true? Who is teaching them that? While we expect better from our kids than the last generation, mums are not all misandrists passing this on to their toddlers or teens.

Just like mums are not all misogynists teaching their sons that girls are just there to take care of them, not all mums are misandrists telling their sons they are bad for being boys - it's not all on mums. Cultural learning comes from many angles and sometimes just from the attitudes in the environment.

I was once at a school doing a focus group discussion on safeguarding, and as part of the discussion, one Y9 boy nervously spoke up that everything to do with wellbeing at the school was aimed at girls, that he felt that there was an attitude that boys are just a problem that need to sort themselves out or at most, that they should sort it out through football - and not all of them like football. All 12 student - even split evenly between girls and boys - adamantly agreed that this was an issue. It was one of the best conversations we had with the kids came from that as we dug into what they thought was needed and the issues between the sexes in the school, including that a lot of sexual harassment going on was more same-sex harassment, particularly girls on other girls, but also boy on boy, but that it was getting ignored.

This was discussed with the Safeguarding Lead who made all the right noises - and turned around and made 2 more wellbeing groups for girls.

A couple years on, same school, struggling with boys doing far less well than girls and struggling with engagement. Their only group that was wellbeing focused that boys could access was still only the weekly mixed sex football lunch club, with occasional half-terms with a boxing coach that was invite only. I was aware of girls having been given permission to change in the disabled toilet rather than in the girls' locker room as a way around the harassment going on, but still no changes in the policy or in how it was being documented (it was documented as bullying, only boy on girl was documented as sexual harassment). The kids literally gave them a blueprint and they ignored it. I can only guess as to the reasons for that.

I've also heard 8-10 year old boys include in their description of men "they just want to hurt girls and women". It's getting there fairly young.

I imagine both sexes have a sense of whether they are a good person or a bit of a shit bag.

Some of the worst people in the world think they are great. I personally think no person is objective enough to know that there are a good person, it's something only others can determine, and I view anyone who says they are a good person with immediate suspicion as IME they tend to excuse any shite they do with their supposedly good intent rather than care about the impact.

Surprised by the voting on this. There isn't a violin teeny enough as far as I'm concerned. A good start would be for all men just to acknowledge the benefits that male privilege has bestowed, and continues to bestow, on them before they even get up each morning.

There are countless number of issues in the world. As the quote goes - the good thing about everything being so fucked up is that no matter where you look, there is great work to do. I do think those working in this, and many other areas, are admirable. That doesn't mean we need to be part of it - I don't think any person can actually care about all of them and it'll only harm us if we try.

It's not unreasonable to put your energy and care where you want to - especially as the source for being to care is your brother who reads like he's just dumping onto you rather than looking for solutions or really any support. As many said, it would be very different if it was a son who had been harmed and was looking for guidance and help.

I think it's better when people focus their efforts in the areas for the causes that matter to them rather than trying to cover everything. I don't think it helps when people are either pushed to try to cover everything. I also don't think there is a need to be antagonistic towards causes even if we don't care about them. While it may feel good, there is little benefit in treating others who care about a different cause as if they're taking away from one's own.

I view it like this - I don't really care about issues in my birth country, I left over twenty years ago, the writing was on the wall there well before then, I know others who left who are doing great work to help out.. I'm not going to shite on those who do, I'm not going to point out to them that the country has caused a lot of its own problems as they're very aware and we're all very aware that the ones suffering the most are the ones with the least power with little involvement in making the problems that are currently harming them - I don't have to care or get involved, I might change my mind later, but I'm not going to be guilted into doing so, and I can still see that the work is there and I'm glad others are trying to find out what can be done to make the world better in that way while I try in other ways. I can understand everyone has suffering in their lives without feeling the need to be the one to try to fix it or even to get emotionally involved in it. I'll only spread myself too thin and drain myself to be of any good to anyone.

This is one of his arguments but is this actually true? Who is teaching them that? While we expect better from our kids than the last generation, mums are not all misandrists passing this on to their toddlers or teens.

Just like mums are not all misogynists teaching their sons that girls are just there to take care of them, not all mums are misandrists telling their sons they are bad for being boys - it's not all on mums. Cultural learning comes from many angles and sometimes just from the attitudes in the environment.

I was once at a school doing a focus group discussion on safeguarding, and as part of the discussion, one Y9 boy nervously spoke up that everything to do with wellbeing at the school was aimed at girls, that he felt that there was an attitude that boys are just a problem that need to sort themselves out or at most, that they should sort it out through football - and not all of them like football. All 12 student - even split evenly between girls and boys - adamantly agreed that this was an issue. It was one of the best conversations we had with the kids came from that as we dug into what they thought was needed and the issues between the sexes in the school, including that a lot of sexual harassment going on was more same-sex harassment, particularly girls on other girls, but also boy on boy, but that it was getting ignored.

This was discussed with the Safeguarding Lead who made all the right noises - and turned around and made 2 more wellbeing groups for girls.

A couple years on, same school, struggling with boys doing far less well than girls and struggling with engagement. Their only group that was wellbeing focused that boys could access was still only the weekly mixed sex football lunch club, with occasional half-terms with a boxing coach that was invite only. I was aware of girls having been given permission to change in the disabled toilet rather than in the girls' locker room as a way around the harassment going on, but still no changes in the policy or in how it was being documented (it was documented as bullying, only boy on girl was documented as sexual harassment). The kids literally gave them a blueprint and they ignored it. I can only guess as to the reasons for that.

I've also heard 8-10 year old boys include in their description of men "they just want to hurt girls and women". It's getting there fairly young.

I imagine both sexes have a sense of whether they are a good person or a bit of a shit bag.

Some of the worst people in the world think they are great. I personally think no person is objective enough to know that there are a good person, it's something only others can determine, and I view anyone who says they are a good person with immediate suspicion as IME they tend to excuse any shite they do with their supposedly good intent rather than care about the impact.

Just clarifying this - women attempt suicide more than men, it's just that men (who attempt it less) are more likely to die?