Minor male entitlements

[kentishgirl]

It's not just the big things, it's the little things that are in some way more irritating to me.

Just got out of the dentist. It's a small practise and I guess the receptionist is off sick as the reception desk still had shutters down, so they were a little bit late opening up. One woman was sitting in waiting room when I arrived. A man came in a little after me.

The dentist came out and opened up the desk.

Guess who quickly jumped up and got there to be dealt with first?

'I know this is rehashing last night again slightly but I am just astounded by how quickly men can resort to personal remarks when a woman is engaging them in serious debate.'

Sorry, but really? I am NEVER personally abusive, and have hence have maybe had one post deleted in 6 years on this site. However, just have a look at the personal vitriol directed to me yesterday in this debate. It is not a man/woman thing. It is a personal thing.

And what is this victimhood thing? When I was young, 'interrailing' was a right of passage indulged in equally by girls and boys (or men and women, it was kind of 16-21 agegroup). None of the females were remotely worried about being attacked. We all slept on trains etc. Being strong is really irrelevant. If you are a stranger to a culture and someone sets out to attack you or rob you, being 6'7 is unlikely to help. Sometimes shit happens. It is about an enhanced perception of risk.

I give my young sons an unnuanced and simple message when they come out with a sexist comment. Girls and boys can both do what they want and the important thing is who someone is, not what sex they are.

Just waiting to see how long this derail will go on for, because the man has come back to share his manly (and therefore far more important and reasonable) view.

Shame, the thread was just getting interesting again.

Would you like to borrow my SGM "Hide Poster" imaginary button, Puffins?

Yes, Puffins, you are right, I will depart.

However, if men are unwelcome in this section, and they clearly are (even Pan), it might be time for FWR to dissociate with MN and find another host, as the ethos of MN is that all are welcome to post.

I am all for women only spaces (and men only spaces) but not on a parenting website.

I am also all for an 'ignore' button.

"I give my young sons an unnuanced and simple message when they come out with a sexist comment."

"Buggies are used as convenient placed for uninterested mothers to park babies while they compare trendy accessories"

Oh bollocks, my irony meter broke again.

Oh god! The swimming pool! A great example of how, in confined spaces where people have to make compromises in order to get along, it's the women who are expected to work around the men.
Same on crowded Tube trains too. No, it's fine, I wasn't actually physically occupying that space you just barged into. I'll just move, shall I?

When I was young, 'interrailing' was a rite of passage indulged in equally by girls and boys

Yes, I did it I am not sure how much more dangerous it is now. It was, of course, fairly dangerous back in the '70s and all of us had some squeaky escapes (or not), girls and boys.

I stopped hitch-hiking after the SECOND time I jumped out of a moving car due to imminent rape. (Cars didn't have central locking then - that alone has made it much more dangerous.) I would still pick up a hitch-hiker, but these days I make a value judgement before doing so. Back then I always stopped.

This thread isn't about real risks, though, but perceptions. Your remark, It is about an enhanced perception of risk. actually is the point. Young men still feel enabled/empowered to trust random strangers, certainly more than young women do. I am sure this has quite a bit to do with 'rapey' culture - women in the 70s were definitely not presented as sexual commodities by all our media, like they are now. And it's reasonable to infer that this has significantly increased the actual risk of sexual exploitation.

involves telling women that they are personally flawed, manipulative or outright liars when there is disagreement. Several of us report having experienced this, and perceiving somewhat of a pattern. Maybe, from the other side, you perceive a pattern in how women argue. I don't know, you'd have to tell me how this looks from your perspective.

Good point! Without the slightest goady intent, Larry, do please answer this: it could actually be constructive.

Buffy,

'You deny the pattern of behaviour in disagreements and you deny the gendered nature that we perceive. You say you yourself aren't abusive, and that there is no gendered element to the sorts of gaslighty behaviours that we have experienced. But as you are not female and have never experienced life as a woman, I'm curious to know how you can know how it feels to be one disagreeing with a man? Why aren't our perceptions of what-it-is-like-to-be-a-woman-arguing-with-a-man valid? Why are your perceptions more valid?'

Where have I ever said my perceptions are more valid? Perceptions are perceptions. We all have our own and they change over time. However, I do talk and spend time with plenty of women. And they all have their own perceptions, which do not seem to correlate well with many I read on here. And also, when I talk about interrailing, those are not my perceptions, but facts.

Equally, it is a fact that I just moved out of the way of several women joggers and dog walkers on my morning run. I was always brought up to be chivalrous (a very outdated term) and instinctively give way to women. That, however, could also be perceived as sexist.

But, I will leave it there as I will be accused of barging in and dominating a female space. Fair enough.

Swimming pools - ime, it's not the swimmer that causes the problem, but the stroke. More men swim butterfly, with loads of turbulence & splashing. (Swimming inefficiently, then, but that's their right.) A pool I used instigated a Butterfly Lane, by popular request. It made everyone happier.

You get more blokes dive-bombing pools where there are other users in the bomb zone - I don't think that counts as male entitlement, it's just being an oik.

'There are several male posters who do just fine.'

Not many, and not for long. The sensitivities are so high that they all put their foot in it accidentally, eventually.

Everyone puts their foot in it sometimes. This doesn't demonstrate anything unusual.

May I expand on that? It's a tiny derail. What matters in discussion, as I'm sure you understand, Larry, is not the foot-putting but the subsequent response.

"I misunderstood you there; I see you meant XYZ. Thanks for explaining. I agree/disagree with XYZ because of ABC."

or

"I'm sorry I offended, it was unintentional. Would you mind explaining?"

Not very hard; we all do it all the time ... don't we?

'involves telling women that they are personally flawed, manipulative or outright liars when there is disagreement. Several of us report having experienced this, and perceiving somewhat of a pattern. Maybe, from the other side, you perceive a pattern in how women argue. I don't know, you'd have to tell me how this looks from your perspective.'

I am never personal. Personal abuse shows intellectual flaws. I DON'T perceive a pattern in how women argue. I think there may be subtle differences between men and women but they are overwhelmed by other factors. There is certainly a pattern in how women on this board argue, but that is another matter altogether. I take each person how I find them.

I do have a tendency to play devil's advocate (which I sometimes overdo). I do that equally to men and women, though, and try to avoid it on sensitive issues (though I have made mistakes here, sometimes).

I do have a tendency to play devil's advocate - Heh, me too

I had to learn a long time ago, though, that it's not enough to say "That's tosh, you're wrong." Funnily enough, your co-debater takes it as an insult and assumes you're just there for a macho face-off. You have to show some level of appreciating their point of view or, if you really think it's tosh, ask them for a clue. Otherwise, you'll never actually 'win' an argument; only the face-off.

Garlic,

Yes, true. I once did a course in giving and receiving annual appraisals. It is very true that most people detest criticism, even when constructively given. I once gave someone an annual review which was glowingly positive and we spent the next hour discussing the one element which I had suggested could improve. We all have to fight that tendency in ourselves.

Here's another.
If a woman wants to make a statement in a serious debate she often hedges and caveats and softens and finesses it to within an inch of its life, because otherwise she is likely to get dragged into a quagmire of what-aboutery in which her original point will be lost and the men involved in the conversation will chalk it up as a win because they think they have demolished her argument.

It makes starting to get involved in a discussion so time consuming and wearing that women sometimes don't bother even starting.
I know I feel that way a lot of the time.

I see women shout at and bully fellow workers because they are in a superior position.

And how often does a woman shout at a man who is her superior?

I have also had incidences with Muslim men, not all of them, just some. And you know what? The white converts are the worst.

Yes that's right I'm making a huge racist generalisation. The fact that it is my experience should of course be ignored because I'm not a man.

Thanks Buffy! I think it stems from men being encouraged to take a view on 'how things are' from an early age. I find it intriguing to listen to my male colleagues talking to each other. They will make such absolutist statements of fact with complete assurance. When one of them is shown to be wrong there is no mockery or rubbing his face in it, it's just brushed aside.
I marvel at their confidence in making such absolutist statements of fact and judgement, and I also marvel at their ability to brush off finding that they are totally wrong. It doesn't seem to bother them in the slightest. I'd be mortified.