Is feminism unfairly demonising boys/men?

[Axolotlquestions]

I'm seeing a lot of pushback at feminism in 'gender critical' circles because it's being lumped in with critical social justice. That is, the mentality that says all white people carry the guilt of centuries of racism is also applied to the concept of sexism, with all men being blamed for patriarchy. I'm trying to get my head around my position on this.

Could the wise feminist minds of Mumsnet take a look at this and give me your thoughts?
genspect.org/girls-are-better-than-boys/

Chivalry is just another way of making out women to be weak and not able to do things for themselves

On this topic - it doesn't mean 'women are weaker' it's just often things were build for males and thus, it is automatically difficult for women to do the same things the same way.

One example I use is that of when I used to be an engineer. We would take soil samples from construction sites and bring them back to the lab for analysis. Traditionally, the men used huge bags filled with sometimes 60-70kg of soil. This is impossible for a woman to lift. When I was promoted and thus responsible for ordering in this sort of stuff, I ordered bags half the size. Yes we then took smaller samples, and if we needed more we'd just use more bags. Often we never even needed 70kg of soil, 50 was ample and often 30 was more than enough [it depends on the size of the largest size of stones in the sample as to how much was needed]. This was mainly to benefit me but alot of the younger men quietly said to me 'thank you' as it was hurting them as well, but they could never say that due to the older [usually ex army] men relentlessly bullying them for it. It didn't mean I couldn't do the job, I just did it differently.

My children, one of each sex, were different in terms of movement levels from pre-birth. I appreciate that is about as small a sample as is possible to get, and anecdotal!

However, this study seems to accord with my observation:

www.livescience.com/62928-why-babies-kick.html

'One study, published in 2001 in the journal Human Fetal and Neonatal Movement Patterns, found that boys may move around more in the womb than girls. The average number of leg movements was much higher in the boys compared to the girls at 20, 34 and 37 weeks, that study found.'

(again, a small sample size)

I haven't read the link. I have a couple of instinctive thoughts on this.

Yes it's true that not all men benefit from living in a patriarchal society.

Living in a patriarchal society has its own unique detriments to average men.

Feminism is not the demonisation of men but the fight for rights, safety and equality for women and girls. If men are the perpetrators of violence or inequality of women and girls in society, they will be seen and treated as oppressors, but men should be able to determine whether this applies to them or not.

Men getting mad at feminism as a concept because they also feel targeted by patriarchal societies is stupid, and is misplaced anger. It's not up to feminists and feminism to appease men who feel they're also mistreated by society.

Feminism fights against patriarchal society and its imposition of gender roles on both men and women. Gendered roles in society harm and place limits on both men and women. Feminism is beneficial for both men and women because it removes constraints on women. This also has the consequence of opening up whatever was constrained to women only, to men. For example, childcare.

Having brought up 2 boys into young men, I feel a little ashamed of my previous (overly?) feminist inspired demonisation of masculinity and maleness.

I think most women want men who are masculine, strong and in control and with discipline, particularly around their aggression. I believe that the male aggression which is very real can become disciplined and focused in the right ways (e.g. in competitive environments such as work or sport) and it is not by default a thing that needs to be obliterated and demonised. My sons are strong males, and I think that will be required when they have their own families. Maybe what I am saying is that most women do not want another woman to have a family with, they do want a healthy masculine man, and given I, personally, believe in the family, then I have tried to bring them up to be ready for that. Clearly they are not perfect, but for sure they are ready to take on the responsibility of a family - which in direct terms for 2022 means if they are expected to be the sole breadwinner they will be, but if their partner wants to work, then that is fine too and they will share the load.

When you put it like that, we ask a lot of men (i.e. we expect them to be sole breadwinners and co-partners depending on what we want) and honestly, that made me sense check some of the feminist material. The flip side of that too is that a friend of mine with similar age sons was disgusted with me that I have brought up my sons to be expected to be the sole breadwinner as a default situation - she thinks that is cruel for boys. But I wonder if she had daughters how she would feel about her having a man who was not prepared to take on the responsibility of a family, solely - not even as an option? I know, I, as a woman, would feel somewhat grossed out by that.

I can't even describe how far away this masculinity is from 'barging women on the streets'. There is a fine line between respecting women as being different (which is true) and seeing them as inferior, but I think it is possible. I don't think for one second that my sons see my inferior physical weakness / or any woman as inferior overall - we are just different and bring different things to the table. Good masculinity sees the strengths of good femininity and I think feminism has had a tendency to dismiss all the strengths of masculinity

Okay I bit and looked at the article. Got as far as seeing the word "victims" in quotation marks and my eyes rolled so hard I can't read anymore.

It's just the same old MRA shit.

”And then you learn you can opt out – from male privilege, toxic masculinity, and rape culture –
from all of it. Being non-binary or pansexual or some gender identity even more exotic means
you don’t have to be a member of the bad patriarchy. You can’t help being white, of course, but
you can offset that particular stain by standing as an ally to women and oppressed minorities.
You can tell people you’re attracted to all spirits, regardless of the bodies they inhabit. Once
you identify as trans, your escape is complete, and you find solidarity with all those other
victims of the patriarchy, of white supremacy, of cis-heteronormativity. You, too, have been
harmed by toxic masculinity.”

This is fascinating.

Oh, this is interesting.

Much larger study (>6k).

www.hoajonline.com/devbiol/2055-4796/1/1

Sex differences in fetal activity and childhood hyperactivity

'By the fourth month of pregnancy, mothers reported that males were significantly more active in the womb than females. Also, fetal activity was positively correlated with hyperactivity following birth, especially for males.'
...

'We believe that the most likely explanation of this study's findings regarding both sex differences in physical activity before and after birth as well as within-sex associations between prenatal and postpubertal activity levels have biological underpinnings. Specifically, fetal brain exposure to androgens appears to promote physical activity both in humans [32,38,39] and in rats [40]. By the second trimester of gestation, male gonads have formed into functioning testes, thereby producing testosterone at higher levels than female ovaries [41,42]. This prenatal exposure to testosterone permanently organizes the brain in ways that promote greater physical activity throughout life [43,44]. As a consequence, males tend to be more active than females before birth as well as afterward. Furthermore, due to considerable within-sex variations in brain exposure to testosterone while the brain is being sexed perinatally, activity levels before birth positively correlates with activity levels following birth even within each sex.'

Society colludes in permitting men to escape their responsibilities if they are that way inclined and in encouraging them to blame others for their own shortcomings. You see this daily in the unfair allocation of household/childcare responsibilities in most relationships and in the 'nagging wife' stereotype.

I think there is also a very deep problem in all this about how men and boys establish dominance hierarchies. There’s often a physical component, especially when they’re younger, but even when they’re older more physically imposing men often have a social status advantage. And there are other unspoken rules about how men establish status and dominance that don’t apply to and don’t work for women.

So then the idea that women are playing the same games as men and competing for the same prizes enrages and upsets them because by male rules we should be at the bottom of the hierarchy, and the porn they watch only reinforces that. And we’re not at the bottom, at least not to the extent their stupidest instincts tell them we should be. So they get this notion that women are privileged or live life on easy mode or [insert incoherent MRA nonsense]. I don’t know what the solution is, it’s something for men to work out. But I think teaching them that men and women are the same adds to this deep resentment and that manifests itself in the form of MRAs, AGPs, incels etc.

@hamstersarse you think women want men to be the ones in control of the family?

thatd be a hard no from me…

My sons are strong males, and I think that will be required when they have their own families. Maybe what I am saying is that most women do not want another woman to have a family with, they do want a healthy masculine man, and given I, personally, believe in the family, then I have tried to bring them up to be ready for that. Clearly they are not perfect, but for sure they are ready to take on the responsibility of a family - which in direct terms for 2022 means if they are expected to be the sole breadwinner they will be, but if their partner wants to work, then that is fine too and they will share the load

I think you've articulated this really well but I don't agree with it. I think the qualities you are describing as "masculine but in a disciplined and focused way" are simply just... good qualities. Good qualities that well adjusted and well brought up people have. In the context of society we have gendered those qualities.

I'm not saying there's no difference between men and women, at all. I just think that we have too long as a society relied on a stark distinction between masculinity and femininity, rather than maleness and femaleness.

There is a really thought provoking song lyric I heard recently by Jamie Bower (think that's right, the guy who plays Vecna in Stranger Things", it goes like this:

"And then you threw it away and told me to be a man,
But I was"

We don't need to relentlessly attribute good and bad qualities to men and women in terms of their masculinity or femininity. I don't need a "masculine man". I need a man that I find attractive that shares my values and has good and attractive qualities. What is inherently masculine about being assertive in the workplace, or calm in a crisis, or kind to people weaker than them, when we actually stop and think about it? Why do we choose to categorize these things in this way?

That's the sort of response that puts me off feminism these days. It is so ideologically driven, no examination of what reality is

Do you honestly, really, think that is what I have said?

@Dreamwhisper

I hear you. It's complicated. I guess I have chosen the family example because it is so stark that there are differences between male and female, and therefore masculinity and femininity are stark too.

When a woman has a baby, femininity is at it's strongest iteration. And it requires a man who is also delivering masculinity in its strongest iteration.

The rest of life is more complicated, but at that time, the differences have to be acknowledged and men being good men matters a lot.

Anyway. given all the complications, that is what I thought was a 'no regret' action in bringing up my boys - I needed them to understand that specific responsibility as a man.

You said 'I think most women want men who are masculine, strong and in control and with discipline'

So yes that's why the question was asked. It isn't ideologically driven, it is just a response to your words.

And honestly, isn't an easy message to deliver to your child. To tell them to be prepared that their future is being responsible for at least two other people, solely, if that is what is required , honestly, that is a difficult one to sell.

And I suppose I mention my friend's reaction to that because she is genuinely lovely, and normal, but thought that message was too harsh. I also suspect that that is the norm these days. In times gone by, men knew this, explicity - do most men know this now? I don't think so. Yet, I think it is what women want most from men?

I am having a little think, and although girls can have agitated energy and need to go outside in the fresh air and shake it out (especially when they are going through a growth spurt), just like boys, I think there is a difference.

The difference is that girls are more compliant and boys are more menacing (a combination of nature and nurture), so a teacher who says “the boys needs to be able to run around in the fresh air” really means, “the boys need to fuck off outside in the fresh air or I am going to lose my shit”.

I think most women want men who are masculine, strong and in control and with discipline

OK, that is being read wrong (because I have worded it clumsily)

I think most women want men who are masculine, strong, in control of themselves and with discipline

Did you read the study I posted up thread? Regarding the effects of testosterone on movement, activity, hyperactivity.

I’ll take a look, cheers

And honestly, isn't an easy message to deliver to your child. To tell them to be prepared that their future is being responsible for at least two other people, solely, if that is what is required , honestly, that is a difficult one to sell

Perhaps it would go down better if if you thought of the breadwinner/SAHM relationship as an equal partnership rather than as the breadwinner being “responsible for” everyone else.

I hope that this was just unfortunate phrasing?

Yeah, you know what I meant. Financially responsible.

The thing is about healthy financial responsibility from a man, is they can only do this if they have utmost respect for the role that the woman is playing. So it has to come from a place where they respect the partnership, respect the SAHM. I think we all know what it looks like when that respect doesn't exist.

I think it was Jung that said - "The most masculine man has a feminine soul" and that makes sense in this context. This very masculine man who is 'taking responsibility for the family' is doing it for very good 'feminine' reasons (i.e. care and nurture)

Honestly? Part of my belief in feminism is directly rallying against the notion that I once becoming a mother should be aiming to be a SAHM while my partner works out of the home and is the sole breadwinner.

I still don't understand what you mean though when you say about men needing to be most masculine at the time of their partners giving birth. Because in my view, being stereotypically masculine in the eye of society conjures up buzz words and images that are not at all associated with how I would want my male partner to be like around me or a newborn. Is it masculine to be attentive to your partner, to put others first and to be nurturing and tender with a woman in a delicate position and your baby?

What makes it definitively masculine?

I'm not having a go at you btw, tone is hard to read on the internet, I'm just very interesting in further exploring the idea of good qualities being associated with masculinity in men, and femininity in women. Because it's precisely where I think society is going wrong and I think it's precisely the values a patriarchal society is built on.

I think it was Jung that said - "The most masculine man has a feminine soul" and that makes sense in this context. This very masculine man who is 'taking responsibility for the family' is doing it for very good 'feminine' reasons (i.e. care and nurture)

So it's more accurate to say that men who are good men are good men because they don't define themselves by their view of what "masculine" stereotypically means, rather that they are able to embrace aspects of themselves which would be described as both masculine or feminine.

Perhaps we should push this further though and do some critical thinking about why we associate good qualities in either sex as either masculine or feminine. And why we don't just consider them as good qualities for a person to have. Does it stem from us having set perceptions about what men and women in society should be doing?

I found another link from the same author about a similar topic, masculine traits.

Stuff like this just fills me with a tingling sense of dread and fear. Do men really think like this? I'm not saying I don't agree with some points of the article, and I do understand that it must be hard for men to live with the disconnect that women are subject to as well of seeing idealised versions of themselves, but he's ultimately saying - men are designed to be violent, aggressive and domineering. So why criticise us for it?

themalestrom.com/culture/dr-joseph-burgo-manshame/

Estrogen also regulates the menstrual cycle, of course, during which it produces a number of familiar changes such as mood swings, irritability and – in the more severe state of PMS – depression, feelings of helplessness, bouts of crying, and rage.

No, it doesn’t. In fact it does the complete opposite. (Though I’ve seen men saying exogenous estrogen makes them depressed, perhaps he’s getting his information from those guys.) Someone tell this plonker to shut his uninformed ass up and never speak on any subject again. He doesn’t deserve to be listened to. What an egregiously stupid mistake made in the service of an even stupider argument.

And for the record in case the fuckwit finds this thread: no one’s blaming men for their hormones or their moods but for their behaviour. And they aren’t held responsible for their behaviour nearly enough.