Is MN feeding unhealthy attitudes towards men?

If men didn't agree with patriarchy, then we wouldn't have patriarchy anymore. The only ones who don't agree with it are the ones who are not only the victims of it, but have the insight to see that its the reason for their plight. Most men benefit from it more than they lose. Most of the ones who lose don't blame it. They blame us.

That last example is the one that irks me the most. There's been so many threads I've read on MN which have this theme of "I've chosen for our marriage to be sexless, how dare he choose to discuss opening up our marriage." And other women supporting that view.

It's what I read between the lines of the "Would he really be that stupid?" thread, although the poster hasn't said that directly.

And several posters ignoring that the OP on that thread hasn't got the right to tell XH not to date.

I completely agree that the OP needs to take control of the situation and end things herself rather than be his puppet, but I'm thinking there's a few things the OP hasn't said as she understandably is wanting others to be as cross at him as she is.

To be fair, did men alive now create the patriarchal standards? I think it's difficult to view men now as creating patriarchal ideas like that. Men are born into a system with certain ideas and expectations of them, and women, and they may not necessarily agree. They're not a homogenous group working in concert.

Namechanged for this thread due to sadsacks who go back and check if the poster has posted before, and if so, what they've said.

I've had 5 DMs, yes. I'm not sure that says anything besides 5 people who don't feel they can post their views on a public thread because their opinions go against the grain. I was surprised to find any if I'm honest. People should feel free to post their thoughts directly to the thread but their prior experience of other posters has seemingly left them uncomfortable to do so.

A website like Reddit or Pistonheads doesn't have a figurehead like Justine is for MN. I suspect those sites don't have the opportunity to interview/post questions to government ministers on their forums like MN do, although as a non user of both, I can't say that as a certainty.

I think the idea is that we are attracted to tall, outgoing, confident men because the patriarchal society has convinced us that men should be strong leaders, and women weak and fragile and in need of protection, and that these ideas are to our detriment because they keep us in a subordinate position.
However, my view is that the only people who really suffer from this particular manifestation of patriarchy are men who don't fit the masculine ideal, and I'm not overly concerned about that in all honesty.
Partly because the impact is exaggerated. Short men do get dates, they just maybe have a smaller dating pool than tall ones, and can't get any woman they want.
Partly because I think its a bit of a cheek to set up a society in a way that benefits some men then ask women to make sure that the men it doesn't benefit don't lose out.

Absolutely agree. The recent stag do thread about the sex worker abbreviations was full of people saying their partner wouldn't have gone.

Just because someone the OPs partner doesn't even know happens to be going on the same stag do and is planning on using sex workers OPs partner obviously is too. He definitely can't be trusted to go and not do anything wrong! All sorts of people go on stag and hen dos, no-one can control what someone else chooses to do.

Also there's so much hypocrisy. If it's a finances post with a woman saying she doesn't want to spend her life savings on her husband it's her money, if it's a man saying it it's their money.

The "ick" threads are mostly not about appearance (see: low earning, bisexuality). They're about a masculine ideal just as much as MRA threads about women's appearances are about a feminine ideal.

And again it is the way in which men who fall short of that ideal are talked about, not an individual woman's preference. I personally am not attracted to ginger men. I don't go around talking about that or trying to justify that - I simply don't sleep with them. If I posted online or said out loud that ginger men give me the ick, then I would be a massive twat - and that is what the red flag would be. (See the poster a few above you who implied that bisexual men are riddled with STDs, for instance, and who equated "low-earning" with "lacking ambition".)

That was the problem with the poster who tried to tell me there was no such thing, though - she didn't bother to explain her pov at all, it was just 'there's no such thing', end of. I do have to say, though, that although I agree misogyny and misandry aren't exact opposites due to the power imbalance, I disagree that sexism from women towards men doesn't merit its own term.

I genuinely don’t even get why we need to be against it. Everybody had things that attract them and repel them. As long as nobody is harmed then who cares about what people find attractive?

It is just SO weird to me!

I am not going to be with men I am not attracted to to smash the patriarchy!

It’s also another case of women carrying men’s water for them. Men never police each others preferences. Most men (for example) have height preferences yet no man would ever comment on it.

Interesting.

There's a good amount of posters on this thread that agree with me, yet you still label it a "me" problem.

Perhaps you need to read an entire thread to properly engage in such discussions, rather than be one of the MN women who try to pile onto a poster who disagrees with them regarding men?

I haven’t heard this at all. The worst vitriol I’ve heard is routinely handed out to female politicians, far worse than the male ones, and particularly from men!

Having worked in a male dominated environment for decades I manage to see them with their respectable faces off, being the only woman there I’m now an honorary man and they don’t try to be decent for me like they do their wives, sisters, mothers and friends. It’s eye opening and is 100% why I’ve lost all respect for most men and will never have a relationship with one ever again. Loads of women are totally deluded about the men in their lives and how they behave/talk when pack mentality takes over.

It's cute that you think men don't talk negatively about women they're not interested in. Hell, they'll use degrading, dehumanising language about women they are interested in, and often volunteer it – making unwanted and unnecessary commentary about how women in the public eye look and whether they'd fuck them.

Women on Mumsnet tend to only talk negatively about men with traits they're not attracted to if asked what they think of that trait.

A lot of behaviours in relationships are very 'gendered' though, unfortunately. If people don't want to be stereotyped, maybe they should stop behaving in such stereotypical ways!

I also think MN is very pro divorce and very against anything other than a 50:50 split in domestic chores and childcare, regardless of hours worked in paid employment.

Really? I don't read Relationships much but if that's common when a woman has an affair, that's shocking.

Women and children, or civilians in general, are not protected in conflicts if they happen to be in the territory where the conflict is taking place. They are (gang) raped and often executed, as seen in Sudan, Ukraine, and historical wars - and frequently by the 'liberating' troops as well. They're also bombed.

For instance, civilian casualties in WW2 are estimated at 38-40 million, versus 15-20 million battle deaths.

Is this April fool?

I will probably get flamed for saying this but I have thought there have been double standards for a long time on MN. If a woman admits to having an affair, she is often encouraged to not confess to it and what he doesn't know won't hurt him, but if the male is the perpetrator, It's a firm vote of LTB and take everything from him apart from the clothes he is standing in.

The bar is getting lower because women are discussing behaviours that they find unacceptable?

So, by that same logic.... the climate crisis continues because scientists keep talking about it?

Something doesn't seem to add up here.

You have to remember that people rarely post about their good, helpful, kind, capable, loving blokes.

I agree OP. So many smart wonderful women on here but my goodness there are some idiots too. Only a handful, but they are so bigoted they have lost the ability to critically think. I think they target certain threads and make irrational sweeping statements. I've even seen some defend this saying they will always believe the woman is right regardless of circumstances. That's pretty worrying isn't it, they are no better than incels.

It's also worth remembering the many many good men who have suffered badly at the hands of the worst kind of powerful men. There is an idea here that all men are privileged but it's forgetting we are all sitting here with our WiFi and phones complaining about the world when none of us or our mothers or grandmothers lay in trenches or had legs blown off in battle or suffered torture in a POW camp. These might be historical in our part of the world but the same stuff is going on today elsewhere, as we know. We all know we will never be asked to march out as fodder, we will be protected first in a conflict.

I didn't acknowledge the effect of MN on my thoughts until this morning. It's been a subconscious slow creep I've not been aware of. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.