Happy to be women today in the UK

[mrsmuddlepies]

I posted about this on the Chat forum but no one responded and I think it is a significant piece of research.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37600771
The level of satisfaction with being a woman in the UK today is higher than it has ever been, a huge increase on that of 50 years ago and much higher than that of male satisfaction with being men today.
A cause for celebration?

"It is generally inappropriate to play fight at a party or in school.

Why is that even remotely controversial? "

I'm baffled too.

Pear, maybe we should start again. I assume that reducing interpersonal violence in the world is a goal you agree with, right?

and there's nothing to be done to prevent it

No. We already have means to control it and dissuade others from engaging in it. We've taught them it is wrong since forever, using many other tools, e.g. religion. You are the one saying that it's not worked and doesn't go far enough, and the entire edifice of "masculinity" needs to be torn down, people are validly asking what this might mean and what evidence you have that it will work. Since men are the cause of all the problems, and young boys are the ones the will become men, obviously they are the ones we should focus the attention on ?

The vast majority of men aren't violent (however much they may have enjoyed fencing with cardboard tubes in their younger days).

Most men who are violent have grown up in families where violence is normalised, and are just replicating what they've seen around them.

No, I'm suggesting that your(?) solution which is to "feminise" men or discourage "masculinity" is largely futile and that preventing/controlling/organising violence is the story of the entire history of humanity....why are you so sure that "gender" is the problem and if you fix that all the problems will go away ?

What does feminising men mean to you, Pear? How is it different from preventing violence?

Do you think some children are too violent?

You keep asking me questions and not answering of mine.

*any

almond

That's a good question, I'll need to think about it....maybe it isn't different.

I'd also like to know about ADHD.

I don't know any kids with ADHD, much less one given medication for it,

Is ADHD as common a diagnosis in the UK as it is in the U.S., and for those that have it, are they likely to be given medication in the UK?

Because much of the claims around feminisation of boys and controlling boys behaviour I see from people who make that argument seems to be drawn from their understanding of parenting and schooling in the U.S. It doesn't chime with what I've seen in the UK.

Ooh, I know this one, pear!

If you want FWR posters to engage with your posts, maybe don't use the word feminazis, even if you are ostensibly quoting.

Nighty night

The previous survey was in 1951, 65 years ago!

Then my pdgm was 42 with a 6yo and 10yo. She worked ft in a job she enjoyed, had a happy marriage and the next year moved into a new built council house.

My mdgm was 39, sahm with a 7yo, 5yo, 3yo and was pregnant. She lived in a 3 bed detached country cottage in a beautiful location which she owned outright (no mortgage). However her marriage was unhappy as her husband liked the drink.

Is my life really better than theirs? In a private let? With a dp who's unemployed? With hours commuting? With DCs being exposed to a pornified society?

Some things have improved but a lot is much worse!

almond... ADHD is much more likely to be diagnosed in the US than the UK.

ADHD is thought to be the most common disorder of childhood. A 2009 study in the USA found that 6.3 per cent of children aged 5-9 were diagnosed with ADHD. In contrast, just 1.5 per cent of parents in the UK reported a diagnosis of ADHD in children aged between 6-8. The team looked at figures from the UK Millennium Cohort Study, which is a sample of more than 19,000 children, representative of the UK population. (from a 2013 study)

There's a really interesting discussion to be had about diagnostic criteria change in the new DSM and how this affects diagnostic rates and why. I can hold forth on it if anyone's interested.

Almond

I suppose i had this picture in my mind of a spectrum, at one end are behaviours thought of as feminine and at the other end are behaviours thought of as masculine. Perhaps I am missing the point, but it seems like the desire of many feminists would be to chop the right hand (masculine) side of the behaviour spectrum off and then shake it all up so that people can land anywhere on the spectrum regardless of their sex, then you wouldn't need a spectrum at all.

So I admit that the "feminisation process" is largely the metaphorical chopping off of the masculine end of the imaginary behaviour spectrum. The message this would send is that feminine is good and masculine is bad, but we just wont call them those names any more.

This is quite a radical theory, it supposes that the entirety of human history has been based on the misconception that violence and aggression amongst and between males is inevitable and needs to be channelled and controlled. That somehow the history of the humane race could be rewritten if we just taught boys that violence was wrong.

Yeah,you are missing the point.

Qualities that might be perceived as masculine such as, say, bravery, are not being "chopped off" (grim language, by the way)

Are you, personally, violent, growapear? Are your male friends and relatives violent?

I have a large circle of male friends, relatives and colleagues and have never seen any of them be violent in any way, beyond low-level fighting as children (often seen in girls too!). (Of course a few of them may be violent in private :()

These men's lives and the lives of those around them are enormously improved by the fact that they have been taught in childhood to settle issues by non-violent means. Violent men are generally not happy men, and ending up in prison, losing their jobs and partners and access to their children isn't exactly going to make them happier.

I am really baffled, growapear, by your belief that trying to end male violence is somehow a bad thing.

Irene

Where do you think that I said ending male violence is a bad thing? I ask again what evidence do you have that society doesn't care about male violence or that your approach of dismantling gender (whatever that means) is the one genius idea that humanity has been missing ? The insistence that anyone who questions the effectiveness of this is either violent themselves or an apologist for violence is bloody typical.

Pear

On the very first page, you asked about crisis in masculinity and are there any masculine behaviours that are desirable. This was nothing to do with the topic of the thread but hey, topics wander. Of course, that's where you chucked in feminazis as well.

What you didn't do and haven't done throughout is identified any behaviours or traits that you consider masculine other than violence/play fighting, and then you've used that conflation to say feminists want to chop off all masculine traits.

Thanks Xenophile. I also looked up the medication issue, and medication is rarely prescribed for children with ADHD. I know one adult with ADHD. It seems very debilitating and in no way 'masculine.'

Pear, masculinity and femininity have been researched for years by psychologists. They are not on a spectrum at opposite ends from each other. Some people have both very strong masculine and feminine traits. Some have very low levels of both.

It's a bit vague to talk about getting rid of masculine traits without specifying some concrete examples of which ones and how this is being carried out.

I'm not suggesting you're violent at all - the point of my question was to encourage you to look around you and realise that most men aren't violent, and that male violence is not at all inevitable (as you seem to be suggesting) - rather, it is generally the result of upbringing and from seeing other men be violent.

Bee, I agree that some things are worse, for both men and women. The housing crisis being one of them.

almond

That's true about not being able to place people on the spectrum, i hadn't thought of it like that.. I dunno Yonic, I would add things like being unemotional, taking risks, self reliant, non conforming (i.e. not docile) - stuff like that. I don't know whether male violence (on some level) is inevitable or not - certainly I couldn't say with any authority that the only reason for violence is because men see other men being violent. Most men will not be violent on a daily basis, but I bet they have gotten into fights throughout their lives.

I definitely would not consider being unemotional as a masculine state. Lack of emotions is part of psychopathology.

Taking risks, and expecting others to take risks is definitely considered a masculine behaviour and one that society is looking to reduce. It's a huge contributory factor to the higher levels of male workplace fatalities and premature deaths.

I don't know whether or not self reliance is seen as a masculine trait, but there is certainly a growing expectation that men will be self reliant compared to fifty years ago. I think that is making them deeply unhappy, and that they felt far more secure when they were not self reliant and had collective experiences with other people through clubs, unions and strong communities. The rise of individualism has been bad for men, and rather than address that, some Manosphere groups are trying to put more stress on the dynamics of romantic relationships, which I don't believe is going to help men at all.