Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Apparently the world is too 'female'.....

146 replies

docket · 17/08/2009 11:57

DH was voicing his view last night that 'masculinity' is being wiped out and that men can no longer do the things that make them men any more because they are frowned upon and that in a few years there will be a need for a 'masculinist' movement because the world is becoming so 'female'. He inferred that these manly things include shagging and fighting without consequence.

I was trying to make the point that in a world where equality is still a million miles away this kind of whingeing is pathetic and that men were only able to do these things in the past (largely) at the expense of women. I actually had to leave the room in the end because of a strong desire to lamp him.

I think his attitude sucks and his view of the world completely deranged. These views don't really seem to be in sync with the intelligent, thoughtful man I thought I had married. AIBU, is this just a typical male view? If I'm not, how can I put him right back in his box?!

OP posts:
oneopinionatedmother · 18/08/2009 15:11

more at risk of SEN at school.

this is a benefit - that is, if you have a statement, you are better off than your siste who doesnt have a statement but no-one has bothred to get pne cos she's 'just a girl'

more at risk of exclusion.
more at risk of underacheiebing in education.

boys behaviour is worse. Why? because parents allow it to be worse (jstified by 'boys will be boys' >yech<

more at risk of suicide.
more at risk of mental halth problems.
more at risk of social isolation.

factors caused by socialistation of the kind that causes the above factors.

more at risk of going to prison.

in actual fact, a woman is mre likely to go to prison if she has commited the same crime - men are more likely to be criminals though - so it is highly appropriate for more of them to go to prison.

more at risk of violent assault.

also more at risk of committing a violent aSSAULT.

more at risk of poor family relationships.
more at risk of loosing children.

MORE LIKELY TO BE HARMFUL TO CHILDREN!

bugger capslock.

so, these things are not a consequence of a fairer attitude to women at all.

MrsBarbaraKingstanding · 18/08/2009 15:22

Bloody Hell.

You really believe that having SEN is a benefit??

You really believe boys behave worse than girls.??
Because their parents let them??

YOu erally think men are poorly socialised becuase of this??

You really think basically they deserve all they get??

You seem to be msiing the basic premise to all this WHY? WHY? WHY?

Your conclusin or questioning implies because they are dispicable uncontrollable creatures who need to be feared.

Just the sort of eeply unpleasnt attitude that makes the DH of the OP of this thread have a point about the demonising of men in our society.

I have a wonderful DH, a great Dad and 2 beutiful sons, men do not have to be these monsters you describe, yet many go down this route . Why? look deeper.

juuule · 18/08/2009 15:27

Oneopinionatedmother

MrsBarbaraKingstanding · 18/08/2009 15:32

So.....the...girls behave better beacuse they are parented better? so they do better at school? so they don't get mental health problems? or turn into criminals? or harm children? as much. I guess a few girls have poor parenting also with may too leas them dow this route.?

I'm just a bit confused though, is the root of the problem therefore just fundementally flawed maleness or the parenting of boys, or just a combination of the two?

LovelyTinOfSpam · 18/08/2009 15:48

Can't believe no-one has taken issue with "pregnancy, childbirth and hormones probably do at least initially help women bond with tiny babies better than men. This does of course equalise over time."

I have to challenge this on behalf of my DH. I do not believe that women bond better than their babies than men at all. Some will, some won't. That sort of generalisation is ridiculous.

RE Barbaraking's list. If we are talking about middle class UK people, then that list of problems is not as applicable. No point comparing apples and onions.

I suspect that lindenavery and abetadad may well be onto something re absent fathers though.

LovelyTinOfSpam · 18/08/2009 15:51

barbaraking it is also worth remembering that generally boys express the unhappiness externally while girls do it internally, as it were. So while unhappy boys are out fighting and vandalising and gettign arrested and in trouble at school etc, the equivalent girls are self harming and struggling with eating disorders and so on.

So both genders may be having a hard time in equal measure but the way the boys express it is generally more noticable.

juuule · 18/08/2009 15:52

" If we are talking about middle class UK people, then that list of problems is not as applicable."

Why do you think it's not?

LovelyTinOfSpam · 18/08/2009 16:03

Points re underachievment at school, exclusion, liklihood of imprisonment - that certain downward spiral - are certainly bigger risks for other sections of society.

Points re mental health and family breakdown and so on probably not. But more affluent families less likely to end up on poverty line after family break-up and those children generally have more opportunities due to better schools etc in the first place. So may not be affected as badly.

So while many problems apply to both, the brawling thieving and prison route is less likely for the mc. I think that prison stats would back this up.

ie problems for very poor boys in our society worse and for different reasons than problems in mc.

MrsBarbaraKingstanding · 18/08/2009 16:06

That list is applicable to middle class UK males.

I think you're right in way about expression, but girls will verbalise their feelings more whereas boys will act out.

Females more likely to seek help and to express need for help, and therefore receive it, males more likely to suffer silently and then commit suicide or develop serious mental helath issues.

Women self refer far more for low level depression and anxiety more men suffer with chronic clinical dpression.

Women have more suicide 'attempts' more men actually kill themsleves.

WE could just think silly men they need to ask for help and talk like we do, or consider why this is and ways to address it.

MrsBarbaraKingstanding · 18/08/2009 16:09

Oh yes, if you are a poor black boy your risk factors for nearly everyting will be even greater than a mc white boy.

But just comparing male against female measures, being born male puts you at greater risk for many many things. Mc or not. You can add other fcators and break it down further of course.

LovelyTinOfSpam · 18/08/2009 16:11

barbaraking totally agree with your last post.

If we could solve the problem of men not seeking help then crime domestic violence etc would all see huge improvements. And of course men would be happier. As it is there is a lot of self medication drink drugs etc which in turn leads to further problems.

LovelyTinOfSpam · 18/08/2009 16:15

Well it was your last post when I wrote mine! Your post of 16:06:09 is the one I was agreeing with.

Maybe the thing with men is that their outcomes are more extreme? That they are either the real winners or the real losers in our society. While women tend to achieve neither top dollar boardroom careers on the one hand, nor become ultra violent criminals at the other end. Always some exceptions obviously, but it's a thought. Something to do with the way our society is constructed, that for men it is much more sink or swim than for women, for some reason?

Just thinking out loud...

MrsBarbaraKingstanding · 18/08/2009 16:27

I think the societable problems for men and women are just fundemetally different.

Boys underacheive at school but still earn well.

We need to equally address womens pay and boys underacheivment.

But the attitude from opinatedmother which I think is around alot that boys underacheive just beacuse they're somehow 'bad' is as awful as suggesting women don't progress as far as men in careers because they're just no good at their jobs!

Surely it's obvious in both sitations other comolex factors are at play?

ABetaDad · 18/08/2009 17:51

slug - I do think the woman can and should be dominant too. I am talking about parents 'dominance' in relation to their children. If either mother or father is absent my theory is that one of the children will step into that role but without experience and maturity to carry it out will tend to abuse that position.

To give an example. We have friends who are a couple with two boys. The father has allowed his DS1 to essentially usurp the father's position in the family. The DS1 decides where he sits at table and is violent to his brother. He is disrespectful to the mother. This is a nice middle class family but DS1 is really out of control and his father really needs to do some very simple things to reassert his postion as dominat male and his DS1 woudl be better for it.

Likewise we know another family where the mother is almost totally absent both physically and I woudl say mentally. Her two DDs dominate her if she is there and especially the DD1. The two DDs are extremely badly behaved, have the contol of the house (with an au pair) most of the day and are very disrespectful to the father. Again a nice middle class family.

LovelyTinofSpam - I think there was a thread while ago that backs up your comment that men produce more extreme (i.e risky) positive and negative outcomes.

Catitainahatita · 18/08/2009 18:56

ABetaDad I'm glad you cleared up what you meant by "dominant" because I was a bit put out by your choice of words. I think you might be better phrasing it as "an male-authority figure" or "female-authority figure". Dominance is a word that can be understood to mean more than simple authority and be domineering at the same time, IYSWIM.

As you explained your point, and substitutions of the word "dominant" made, I would be in broad agreement with you. In my experience too, children are allowed (for whatever reason) to rule the roost, as it were, it is detrimental to their development (not to mention unpleasent for their companions).

As for the subject of the OP and what has been said so far. I don't think that even in middle class UK society, there is equality of opportunity for women and men. Women have many more options (on paper) than ever before, but not all of these work out on the ground. Men, on the other hand, have been excluded from some of these options.

Take the question of maternity leave (which I know ABD has views on). It exists in the law and is for the most part respected, although some employers still try very hard to circumnavigate their responsabilities. There is no such legal provision for paternity leave.

While it could be argued that this reflects the physical realities that only females can give birth and breastfeed, I think there is more to it than that. I think that as a society we still consider children to be primarily the female's responsability. ( I have recently read a couple of threads on this subject) and that a man merely "helps" or "babysits" on occasion, but is never the primary carer.
But men can and should share responsability. They should have the same rights as women concerning their children. This would be equality of opportunity. And that way both mothers and fathers would have to address the question that currently (usually) only women face: should I have children or would I prefer to continue building my career without them (as that will be so much easier than trying for both)?

But I do think, having said all this, that at least some of the reason why some men complain about how the world (in the UK) has changed, is precisely because they feel that they have lost out. And indeed they have; for centuries men have had all the advantages. It is fact of life, that nobody really appreciates losing some of their privileges, however unfair they may have been. It is no wonder that some men are not too pleased with it all. It also stands to reason that as our expectations of what is to be female and male are changing, some people feel threatened by this. "Who I am" seems to be being attacked. This breeds resentment and fear, I think.

oneopinionatedmother · 18/08/2009 19:13

But the attitude from opinatedmother which I think is around alot that boys underacheive just beacuse they're somehow 'bad' is as awful as suggesting women don't progress as far as men in careers because they're just no good at their jobs

no. how many times have you seen little girl being hit by brother and parents doing nothing? I was sat with one such girl in he park yesterday. 'i don't want to hit him back' she said. My own cousin (a girl of som promise) was sat with her art project one day. her brother destroyed it, and her mother did nothing saying (ouch) 'boys will be boys'. then again, i saw a boy on a daft quad bike (no more than 5 yo) whilst his sister rode a barbie bike round the park - the little boy looked scared and fell off. Easy to see - boy encouraged to play rough, not cautioned for unnaceptable behaviour - suprise suprise they behave worse than their sisters.
Boys behaviour is worse than girls. Or are you claiming schools are more likely to expell boys without good reason?

They did a study and found that people treat baby girls and boys differently - (dressing baby girls in blue and boys in pink to avoid any pref of the baby being a factor) - encouraging boys to exercise and behave physically and talking to the girls.

now, i think boys and girls are different, as obviously that chromosome makes a difference. But is it any wonder that girls do better in school when they are encouraged from birth to communicate, be sedentary, behave themselves, whilst boys are encouraged to be physical, and are allowed to behave in a worse fashion?

as for SN being a benefit - being recognised as SN is a benefit, one some parents have to work very hard to get. Can you imagine a parent who thinks their little girl doesn't need an education cos she's going to get married anyway working that hard (it can take years) to get their chid that recognition?

Do you think that men in actual fact don't commit vastly more crimes? certainly not true in my experience, all the housebreakers/ muggers/ murderers I've come across have been men - do you think this is because of some prejudice against them?

and if you don't think men are more likely to be violent and unfit to be near - why are there so many women on this forum who have experienced domestic violence?

I might add, the only person i know to have gone to prison was a public-school educated boy who was allowed to do what the hell he wanted all his life from day 1. he now has a good job....

But to claim the 'feminisation' of society has caused the ills listed by Barbaraking...or is the consequence of some knd of prejudice in the way that women face anti-female prejudice of the most blaant kind at work s plan wrong.

ABetaDad · 18/08/2009 19:36

Catitainahatita - yes 'dominance' is a poor choice of word because of conotations of the father dominating the mother which is definitley not what I meant. As I was writing, I did have in mind David Attenborough talking about groups of gorillas where I believe there is both a dominant male and a dominant female. I do think chldren are closer to young apes than we care to think but yes 'authority figure' is a better description.

Sadly, I think it will take men another 25 years before they get paternity rights equal to female paternity rights or rights to share parental leave. Hopefully my DSs wil get that chance.

monkeytrousers · 18/08/2009 19:53

Hi, just got back and not caught up with the thread - just wanted to comment on OneOM's comment re "now, i think boys and girls are different, as obviously that chromosome makes a difference. But is it any wonder that girls do better in school when they are encouraged from birth to communicate, be sedentary, behave themselves, whilst boys are encouraged to be physical, and are allowed to behave in a worse fashion?"

I have just been looking at some of the data for this actually and this doesn't hold up. It's just that girls do tend to behave themselves in class better than boys. That does not make them 'better' generally of course.

In fact boys that struggle in the school system do not necessarily continue this path when they reach maturity. Girls do do better in the classroom than boys, and it's nothing to do with methods changing. But in certain areas they do tend to drop off the radar when they themselves reach maturity. I would recommend Susan Pinkers The Sexual Paradox to get an overview. It's fascianting.

monkeytrousers · 18/08/2009 19:56

And the school system is certainly not feminised, though I am responding to what you say OM said, as I haven't found her original post. But bogeys such as the 'feminisation' of society are red herrings. And, you are right - men by far commit more crime than women. Always have and always will.

oneopinionatedmother · 18/08/2009 20:28

sorry MT, you've lost me..you agree that girls behave better in class, and do better results wise - so what doesn't hold up? do you really believe that parents treat boys/grils equally the same (whole rafts of stats differ ..boys get more pocket money, more likely to be sent to public school etc etc..words used for male babies 'strong' 'clever'...words for girls 'pretty' 'talkative'....)

as for maternity benefits - well, if we had had a choice about which of us was to take 9 months paid off, it would still have been me still, cos I was going to breastfeed. And yes, i think there probably is something in hat X chromosome i possess that makes this right for me even if i wasn't going to BF.

I think the fact that makes the gender gap clearest is the fact that childless women are paid less than their male equivalents. I accept that choosing to take time off is going to damage my career (though i wonder: if you studied men who take time off vs women - I'm betting the women would still fare worse)

i think it is naive in the extreme to believe there are not still people out there who believe women are inferior, and discriminate against them on that basis.

vixma · 18/08/2009 20:34

Don't I know someone with the same views, let it go over your head.....I find it easier to just grin while I think of a catchy tune.

monkeytrousers · 18/08/2009 20:38

No, don't think I explained it right - it's a bit of a paradox.

People across the academic and scienficis board have done studies on this - the biggy being the baby x thingy - but it doesn't hold up. All that's been seen is that parents give their kids sex speciofic toys - they do not hold or talk to or tell off, etc their kids any more or less regardless of their gender - on an average scale. The rest is myth from the Baby x paradgim and latterly from Skinnerian studies which have again been flasified today.

All I can say is read the book - as per - sorry.

MrsBarbaraKingstanding · 18/08/2009 22:49

Schools ceratinly are feminised environments whose stucture and style of delivery preferences girls and dissaffects boys at a yuong age. Less so as they get older, but for many boys the damage in education is then done.

Firstly boys generally (and all this is generalisatiobs with excpetions but a large amount of evidence to support from truth) mature cognitively later than girls and so are not ready for formal education which they are pushed into too early, wheras many girls are more ready.

Boys fine motor skills are often less deveoped than girls at a young age so early writing is a disheartebing experience.

physical education which boys have a prefernce and need for has been increasingl squeezed out.

Exploratory play and learning which is often boys preferred learning route has also been squeezed out (but is hopefully increasingly returning soon).

Discovery learning such as topic work has been ababdoned in favour of more formalised formulaic learning. boys oftne have a preference for discovery learning as they are motiovated by thier own intersts and not in pleasing adults. girls are oftne motivated by pleasing adults and enjoy tasks with 'correct' outcomes which they can achieve and often get stressed by non specific tasks which may motivate boys.

Schools and learning are almost entirely language based whivh is often girls preferred learning method. Opportunities for and credit given to problem solving and spatial abilities which are often boys strengths is very very limited.

Sedentary fine motor, predominantly writing, tasks which dominate much of the current curriculum and school day are very difficult for boys to acheive well in and do not motivate them. this leads to disaffetecd boys who have no belief in themsleves as learners.

95% are primary teachers (or so) are female, with thier own language based perference style and little understanding in how boys learn and why they are underacheieving.

Add to this an number of them may have the awful views of little boys and demonise them and their behaviour which is then self fulfilling and you have lots of sad, 'naughty' disaffeted underacheiving boys.

I have met and worked with many teachers with an anti boy bais and a prefernce for the good easy girls. Boys are often demonised as OM has so nicely demonstrated.

There is lots and lots of reasearch on this at the moment, increasing recognition of it in schools and money going in to set up schemes for boys and educate teachers.

Boys often make up for this at seconadry, where they have more choice over subjects and the system begins to demotiavte girls particuarly in sciences.

can't be arsed to proof read, evidently.

LovelyTinOfSpam · 18/08/2009 23:06

And yet men still earn more than women, from more or less the word go...

ABetaDad · 19/08/2009 08:11

MrsBarbaraKingstanding - you make some very interesting points about education and boys. This rings a bell:

"I have met and worked with many teachers with an anti boy bais and a prefernce for the good easy girls. Boys are often demonised as OM has so nicely demonstrated."

There is a female teacher at DSs school who has only ever taught girls througout her career and DSs repeatedly have said she is very biased aganst boys. Cracking down extremely hard on anything that the boys do but saying nothng when the girls do the same thing.

oneopinionatedmother - I do also agree with many of your points too and very much agree with this:

"how many times have you seen little girl being hit by brother and parents doing nothing? I was sat with one such girl in he park yesterday. 'i don't want to hit him back' she said. My own cousin (a girl of som promise) was sat with her art project one day. her brother destroyed it, and her mother did nothing saying (ouch) 'boys will be boys'. "

Drives me mad to see boys being allowed to exhibit violent destructive behaviour aganst siblings and the parents doing nothing but excuse it.