Sensimilla We don't have to concern ourselves with people's 'self image' for goodness sake. I disagree to a point. I am an atheist but many people I know have what for them is very real a relationship with god. It is fundamental to them emotionally. Agreed I disagree with them and happy counter their belief (in a sensitive way in the right environment) but I do care about their sensibilities too. I wouldn't stand outside a Synagogue shouting to the people inside that their religion is fake and nonsense. I think we do have to have some sensibility when it comes to peoples core values and beliefs. I would just want to dismiss people and their experience like that, same goes with not dismissing peoples gender identity. But anyway that's only my opinion and besides the point of this conversation.
Pumperthepumper go on then, just for you Tue 28-Nov-17 00:01:13 (again)
Well just the amount of conversations asking for a male perspective indicates that some people in some conversations value it. As you may remember I say some conversations its of significance. In the same way that say class, race or gender identification may have significance to some other conversations. For many conversations these factors may have no significance. It don’t take much to work out there maybe value to a male angle in many categories such as AIBU in conversations where sex is a factor, Relationships, Divorce/separation, Parenting for example. The world is still so divided on grounds of sex. But to be fair your question is a bit of distraction from the question of sexual bias. Its more about the presence of bias and hierocracy in relation to sex than a question of when and when not a male perspective is of significance. You are making a very big thing of it but all I was simply adding to the conversation was the there is sometime significance to male voices in some conversations. That’ll all.
Also totally agree than a woman’s voice is as much value as a mans, who wouldn’t? So this exactly both voices complement each other in terms of a more enriched picture. IMO greater diversity in a conversation is a great thing. So it seems adverse to people would not see the benefit of adding more diversity.
Sparklingbrook It is perfectly fine to accept or not accept any ones perspective. As I am also free as an individual to add my perspective to conversation.
Corythatwas so if say it was a conversation on race and I was of a racial minority being discussed clearly I don’t represent all people of my race. But surely being of that race I may have a different insight (that may be more common to my race) to maybe the majority of people posting who race is not mine?
All so you mansplaining argument is indicative of the question. Its fair to say my style is a bit wordy. Maybe some find it a bit patronizing? This is not my intent and style is the same when address men as it is to women. If you did not know I was a man you could not accuse me of mansplianing? The very concept of your accusation comes from knowledge of my sex. The term has become very over used as a sexist slur and misunderstood these days.
I am just an individual like you, like everyone else. We all have some value to a conversation especially in different areas. Maybe we have good insight into a conversation based on race, class, upbringing, career, education, hobbies etc. In a many ways we are all very different and have a right to a voice.
Lweji I agree with you there. As before there are differing opinions out there, different sides of the argument. A lot of posters out there are not hypocritical or sexist. In lots conversations I see people argued against (that’s the point of debate) but sometimes some very malicious activity too. Maybe there is quarter to say some people would use anything, not just sex identity. Having said that I think sex is a far softer target to hit than say race for that sort of person.
Likewise I agree with you on a wider sample. I can speak as a man and by experiences that have been affected by sex but not for all men. It would be wonderful to have lots more male voices on here. I thing MN would be more enriched.
BertieBotts I agree with you this sexual bias is present on MN the say as sex related double standers exist in RL. Consequently if we identify double standards I think it adds value to the argument for more diversity in NM conversations.
On your second point I agree we can be very polarised by sides and this may bias our responses. I also agree that there is no point giving advice to a man who is not is not privy to the conversation, that would be bonkers. However there are a few things that are more common to male than female experience (probably due to socialisation, evolution , privilege etc). So there may well be value in some conversations to a voice that may have a more male perspective. After all understanding is part of solving the problem. And of course as pointed out before if we had more male voices you would have an even wider sample to enrich the conversation.
StatelessPrincess Yes thank you. The way my perceptions have been challenged on MN conversations have added real value and changed the way I see thing. I think that on the whole is part of the value of wide and diverse debate. As to you second part I refer you to the answer near top of page to Pumper.
GetMeOutOfHerePlease Bias is everywhere.
I agree there is a bias, you don’t want the bias to exist? Perhaps the bias would lessen if men started challenging other men when they see them display the behavior in society that possibly results in women being biased rather than complain to the women about being biased? completely agree with challenging other men but surely that doesn’t make reverse sexual bias ok?
I wasn’t suggesting you DD was against mixed teams such as Rugby. Just making a side point that a while back I asked the question of mixed sports team. It did not go down well. Responses like are you being obtuse? It was clearly pointed out to me that men are far stronger than women and to do so would relegate women in the top areas of the female sport to lower positions of the mixed sport. It was made clear to me that to even the idea of mixed sports such as Rugby was misogynistic because it would allow men to totally dominate the sport due to their biological advantages. I don’t think from my recollection anyone in the conversation was in favor of mixed sports team. Although I do know that sports such as roller derby are ok with mixed teams in terms of sex and gender identify.
I’m glad MN has been useful to you. It is a great site and has been very good to me. Not just to opening up new perspectives and ideas to me but also helping me understand myself, getting me though some tough emotional times and lots of practical parenting advise too. You have made me think about my screen name. My perspective will always be male as I am a male. It will always be a British white male because that is my ethnicity. These things I can be no other because they are fixed factors in who I am and these factors have significance in experience. So I will come from that perspective. Although the whole value of a male voice is a total distraction. A few pages ago I simple said that I agreed with another poster in some conversation that in some conversations a male voice added value (like ones asking for male perspective). It was just a little comment but has become the bread and butter of the conversation rather than original question.