# The Demise of Guys



## Solrac026 (Mar 6, 2012)

android654 said:


> People shouldn't 'settle,' it's a bad practice that leads to shitty relationships. Claiming that 'nice guys,' a title so obscure and misleading that it means absolutely nothing about the person, are disadvantaged because women are more vocal about what they want is a cop out. The only thing that has changed is that women are more honest about what they want, which in the end is a good thing.


 @Das Brechen

In the end, everyone settles. Relationships are all about compromising, hardly anyone will ever find their "dream" mate. While I do believe that women are more honest in what they want, I think there is a noticeable, if not large gap, in what they say they want and who they are actually end up with. Example, women saying they want guys with enough sensitivity to listen to to them and fulfill their emotional needs. A lot of 'nice guys' meet this and other criteria. Yet, they get friend-zoned all the time. I can understand and accept that. What annoys me and other men is the hypocritical women who claim to desire certain qualities in a man and then dates or enters a relationship with some idiot who doesn't meet most of the criteria as evident by said woman's bitching of her idiot bf.


----------



## android654 (Jan 19, 2010)

Solrac026 said:


> @_Das Brechen_
> 
> In the end, everyone settles. Relationships are all about compromising, hardly anyone will ever find their "dream" mate. While I do believe that women are more honest in what they want, I think there is a noticeable, if not large gap, in what they say they want and who they are actually end up with. Example, women saying they want guys with enough sensitivity to listen to to them and fulfill their emotional needs. A lot of 'nice guys' meet this and other criteria. Yet, they get friend-zoned all the time. I can understand and accept that. What annoys me and other men is the hypocritical women who claim to desire certain qualities in a man and then dates or enters a relationship with some idiot who doesn't meet most of the criteria as evident by said woman's bitching of her idiot bf.


You're making that same mistake. Fulfilling emotional needs, being a nice and/or sensitive guy isn't all a person needs. So it falls down to weighing two options. You may offer the sensitive nature you claim, but the 'idiot bf' probably provides many other things she looks for. So you can have one need met or several needs met. It's a simply question, no?


----------



## Yardiff Bey (Jun 5, 2011)

perennialurker said:


> The principle of women's choice in sexual selection (the idea that in all mammals, women and not men, choose when and with whom to mate) has been dramatically strengthened by the opening of the labor market to women. Before the labor market opening, a woman's primary, if not sole path to financial security or even any form of life fulfillment was to marry. Therefore any act of courtship was welcomed. Certainly more attractive women still had more choice than others and could turn down lesser offers in favor of better ones. But for the vast majority of women, an offer from a man, even a clumsy offer from a less desirable man was something to take seriously into consideration. Contrast this with today: women now are no longer dependent on men for financial support or for life fulfillment. If a woman likes she can work her entire life and enjoy a rich rewarding career without a thought for marriage. With the threat of an empty life and financial destitution taken off the table far more women are free to be very choosy; waiting for perhaps a much higher caliber man than they would have been forced to settle for decades ago. Let me be clear, I think women's rights are great, but I do think this is an example of a very confounding paradox that is facing modern society. Women's empowerment has given women less incentive to settle for lesser males, leaving many of them out in the cold.


So there are a lot of very young, very pissed-off men out there. (Sexual frustration that cannot be relatively-easily gratified can build up over many years into some disturbing behaviours.)

This brings some disturbing thoughts to mind. The middle-east violence. China having over ten million more males than females. Americans and this thread. /b/ on 4chan (I refuse to link). How a sociopath is formed...


----------



## perennialurker (Oct 1, 2009)

That's part of the paradox though. It seems that the virtual world could be taking some of the sting out of males' sexual frustration (at least in the West) and thereby removing some of the necessary impetus for self-improvement. But yes in poorer countries like China, India, and places in the Middle East, the options for males are much narrower. Revolution will become an increasingly attractive route for them, and we are already beginning to see this.


----------



## 626Stitch (Oct 22, 2010)

> One would think that all this would serve as greater impetus for men to "shape up" and start achieving more


Not everyone can be high status. If achievent is defined as becoming higher status than this is part of the problem.


----------



## Yardiff Bey (Jun 5, 2011)

perennialurker said:


> ...one would think that all this would serve as greater impetus for men to "shape up" and start achieving more...


I have been thinking about this. A question occurs: Why *should* men "shape up"?

By the time a guy has hit 30-35, yes, he can have a well-established career and some assets built up. Then some woman decides that they want to settle down with him. Emphasis on the "settle" - she's probably had a different guy every year or two. And she may have had the misfortune to be fucked-over and fucked-around by one or two player-types every couple of years (shit happens). That's if she's not a party-girl whose had quite a few guys each year, just fucking around and having fun.

Why should he be interested? Seriously.

He has spent 10-15 years building up his assets, now someone who didn't look at him during all that time suddenly expects him to marry and provide for her. She hasn't helped him any, plus she's spent her youth and beauty on 10+ other partners - maybe even has a baby as well.

Think about it. Why would anybody with half a brain and in their right mind want to "shape up" for that.

There have been threads on the divorce-rate (approx 50% - I dug out the stats, find my posts in the divorce thread somewhere). Half your 10-15 years of effort lost, plus paying child-support and possibly maintenance (perhaps for a kid that isn't yours). To someone who didn't help and support you with that sweat and effort.

That does not sound like a good deal. I would not "shape up" for that. It isn't worth it. 

(Note 1: It *might* be worth it if she had the same or more assets than you do - good luck hunting, girls like this would be in great demand.)

(Note 2: I am divorced and lost half my assets of 15 years work. I can personally attest to the pain, though thankfully there were no children involved.)

(Note 3: In my view the following is a general principle: a guy or girl's education and career means squat unless there has assets built up from years of effort. If there are no assets then they simply pissed away what they made enjoying themselves in the moment. Living hand-to-mouth is not intelligent use of your time and sweat. Yeah, I know, personal circumstances yadda yadda - YMMV, that's my opinion, shitty as you might think it is.)


----------



## perennialurker (Oct 1, 2009)

Yardiff Bey said:


> I have been thinking about this. A question occurs: Why *should* men "shape up"?
> 
> By the time a guy has hit 30-35, yes, he can have a well-established career and some assets built up. Then some woman decides that they want to settle down with him. Emphasis on the "settle" - she's probably had a different guy every year or two. And she may have had the misfortune to be fucked-over and fucked-around by one or two player-types every couple of years (shit happens). That's if she's not a party-girl whose had quite a few guys each year, just fucking around and having fun.
> 
> ...



I'm not really sure how to respond. I will just say that my thinking on this thread has been exclusively positivist rather than normative, meaning that my goal is to try to understand how the world works in light of these phenomena rather than how they ought to. I think there is no shortage of exchange by others on this thread about what should be done and how society should respond to these changes. 

The "shape up" statement that you quoted was meant to describe how men might respond in the absence of the aforementioned virtual stimuli. In short you're entitled to your opinions as much as anyone, and indeed it sounds like you have a lot more experience in this area of life than myself. I am just trying to understand how and why these situations work not how they should or how men should respond, in terms of making value judgments.


----------



## Solrac026 (Mar 6, 2012)

I have to say that is definitely one of my fears. I'm only 25, but if I hit 35 I really only see three options
1. Find a mate with similar status to me.
2. Find a mate in her early twenties. At least I'm guaranteed her good years even if she flunks in other areas.
3. Stay single and fuck around with the women who now pay attention to me but don't meet my criteria.


----------



## 29885 (Nov 29, 2011)

Somewhere along the way we forgot we aren't entitled to anything. We are born naked and must make and take that which we need and want. In making our societies so comfortable we also took away our natural drive for keeping ourselves in check. We now have safety nets to fall back upon, so the fear that whipped our backs is gone and useless. We threw away our motivator and now we linger in a limbo, aimlessly.

To reawaken we often need a strong force to push us, and I can only speak for myself when I realised this; some just have to hit rock bottom to see how deep they have fallen.

And even if you have everything in your power to obtain what you want and need, you still aren't entitled to it. It's a neverending struggle, all the way to the finish. We must always prove ourselves.


----------



## android654 (Jan 19, 2010)

Yardiff Bey said:


> I have been thinking about this. A question occurs: Why *should* men "shape up"?
> 
> By the time a guy has hit 30-35, yes, he can have a well-established career and some assets built up. Then some woman decides that they want to settle down with him. Emphasis on the "settle" - she's probably had a different guy every year or two. And she may have had the misfortune to be fucked-over and fucked-around by one or two player-types every couple of years (shit happens). That's if she's not a party-girl whose had quite a few guys each year, just fucking around and having fun.
> 
> ...


No one is saying men should do anything. However, if you refuse to make yourself into the type of person needed to get the type of person you want, then you forfeit the right to complain about it. 

Not all women are looking for someone to support them, that paradigm has been in flux for decades. Women simply want more now and if you want to be with them you have to accept that reality and go along with it. If you don't, then how is it anyone's fault other than your own that women select other men over you?


----------



## android654 (Jan 19, 2010)

626Stitch said:


> Not everyone can be high status. If achievent is defined as becoming higher status than this is part of the problem.


If people did what they wanted, you would see that we define success differently. Not everyone is dying for a seven figure salary or a corner office. Not all people are looking for people who define themselves through the archetypes of old world status symbols either.


----------



## Kuthtuk (Jun 3, 2011)

I think today boys are fucked up in the head cause we may live in a man's world but we have women's rules for the first time ever.


----------



## StElmosDream (May 26, 2012)

Kuthtuk said:


> I think today boys are fucked up in the head cause we may live in a man's world but we have women's rules for the first time ever.


Very funny but oddly true in the stereotypical sense.


----------



## Penguin (Sep 25, 2012)

this thread has been very educational for me. I rarely like anything bill maher says because hes anti christian and makes everything about religion and politics but I liked what he said about us living in a feminist culture, its true.


----------



## MelissaC (May 23, 2012)

I'm jumping back in here, although many interesting and fantastic things have been said while I was away. If I have time I'll respond to those too.



Kuthtuk said:


> I think today boys are fucked up in the head cause we may live in a man's world but we have women's rules for the first time ever.


Maher raises many interesting and quasi-valid points, but does so in a very polarizing (albeit funny) way...as is his MO. I'd be much more apt to agree with him--after all, on the surface he's reiterating some of the same points I have made in this thread--if it weren't presented with such an undertone of "We are men, and we are the newly oppressed! Fuck women!" 

Society is changing, yes. He points out that our country is now dictated by "feminist values", and your immediate reaction is, "He's right! Political correctness is bullshit, and safety labels are undermining natural selection! Ha ha ha!" That was my initial reaction, at least. But then I realized that many of the people on the front lines who get their assholes twisted over such things are men. It's not as though women have infiltrated and completely taken over the media and the government. Our "coddled" society in which toy capes come with warnings that they do not, in fact, enable the wearer to jump off of rooftops safely is not something women are 100% responsible for, and furthermore is not--hopefully--a mark of a "feminist society". 

He implies that anything short of machismo is feminine territory. His married/"enslaved" friends are something to be pitied. They could be out fucking whatever women they want, after all. Instead they can only fuck their wives! And what, that's the hallmark of manliness? Spreading seed? "You are all sitting here tonight because men like to fuck a lot of different broads" (paraphrase). But devotion to the offspring through parental partnership is entrapment. So that's masculinity? I am in awe of your virility, Mr Maher. 

It's a lot of tired old stereotypes. That's why it's so funny...on the surface we can all agree. Then you look deeper and wonder if it isn't a lot of bullshit. Furthermore it's the old either/or again. Your own words above the video capture that as well. "I think today boys are fucked up in the head cause we may live in a man's word but we have women's rules for the first time ever." Either it's a man's world, or it's a woman's. Either we live by a man's values or a women's because what? The two are so different? It's a zero-sum game, I guess. We can't value both "feelings" and "facts" simultaneously. One HAS to win out over the other. One gender HAS to "rule" over the other or it all falls to shit.

There is a lot to be said for the overfeminization of men, which is something I've hit on repeatedly. But it does work both ways. The tenets of professionalism, for example, are stereotypically masculine behaviors. So if we want to battle out in the either/or arena there is plenty of ammo regarding how we as women are expected to masculinize ourselves in the workplace if we want to "get ahead". But those lines of reasoning fall back on the tired, over-idealized stereotypes of what constitutes masculine vs feminine behavior. It strikes me as unproductive to continuing touting that masculinity=promiscuousness, etc...idioms that alienate many guys today who may see value in commitment (oh wait, commitment is a "feminine value" and thus cause for one's man-card to be revoked or, at least, suspended). 

No one is asking men to act like women. And it's disheartening to think how many men, like Maher, believe (or at least proclaim) that going through life with any thought or consideration for the feelings of others is somehow emasculating. _
_


----------



## MelissaC (May 23, 2012)

Yardiff Bey said:


> I have been thinking about this. A question occurs: Why *should* men "shape up"?
> 
> By the time a guy has hit 30-35, yes, he can have a well-established career and some assets built up. Then some woman decides that they want to settle down with him. Emphasis on the "settle" - she's probably had a different guy every year or two. And she may have had the misfortune to be fucked-over and fucked-around by one or two player-types every couple of years (shit happens). That's if she's not a party-girl whose had quite a few guys each year, just fucking around and having fun.
> 
> ...


Disregarding the bitterness (no offense, but the demonization of women doesn't further this discussion in any way) I don't think we're hoping young men will "shape up" for the sole purpose of winning a wife or girlfriend. That implies that the only impetus a person can have for making more of themselves is to accomplish marriage or get laid. Which is, frankly, very easily argued as being the case but is a very one-dimensional view. When I read the post you were responding to I interpreted it in a different way. What I noticed was the qualified or "GREATER impetus to 'shape up'", not "sole impetus". Look, we all wanna get laid (mostly) and many of us would like a relationship of some form. And guys can't really lament their lack of options, or disinterest from the opposite sex, all while hitting a bong and playing a video game or otherwise continuing to be the sort of guy that women don't want to date or screw. 

There are many other, arguably more noble reasons guys should want to "shape up". Like providing some kind of service to the world, or advancing society, or just making this world a marginally better place in which to fart around until you die. I've met several men who are nothing short of geniuses. Intellectually they are capable of amazing things...they could (cliche alert) cure cancer, help to eradicate hunger, take part in solving the financial crisis, whatever. What do they do instead? One works at Subway, having partied away his full-ride scholarship to a prestigious university. Another drinks a lot, plays a shit ton of video games (while his wife works...as he's supposedly working on a novel, for several years now), and waxes poetic about how awesome life will be when the singularity hits. They are, in short, "losers" by any quantifiable measure outside of IQ.

They could use some "shaping up", could they not? And they're both already married (the first is 26 and in his second marriage, in fact). But they epitomize to me the waste of potential that is inherent in this "lost" generation of guys. I can't help but be unable to think of them as men.


----------



## Das Brechen (Nov 26, 2011)

@MelissaC

I agree with @Yardiff Bey was saying(you know without the bitterness) about the group of women out there who claim to be a "strong and individual" woman yet ride the fence of traditionalism. I think it relates back to what @android654 was saying about women having choice of men and men being intimidated by it thus having to "shape up". I don't think that's right and it's downright confusing to me when a woman wants to be independent yet coddled like a child romantically. Not saying every woman is like this, but they are out there in droves from experience, past and current. Of course, you can always avoid these women but like I said they aren't so easy to avoid. I agree with you when you say if you aren't in the game, then you really can't complain when you lose out to somebody else.

I would hope to [insert deity here] that men would be noble in their pursuits at achieving greatness and not for the sake of winning a woman over. Of course, we hear from the more ignorant men out there that women still want us to hold out trinkets whether it be a prestigious career, wealth, and the like and watch them take the bait. I hope not, but some out there still subscribe to that mindset. Some women will go for it, but it's all an individual preference like @android654 had stated earlier.

I don't know if there is an blanket solution for the demise of guys, but the best advice I've gotten so far with input from you all is to find that middle ground and be an example, the benchmark for which others should strive to match or exceed. I don't know if it'll gurantee a guy finding the right woman but it, in my opinion, will definitely filter out the women he doesn't need.


----------



## Jharaiz (Aug 11, 2012)

I'm glad you're back @MelissaC
I've been busy all weekend, i'll check it tomorrow!


----------



## MelissaC (May 23, 2012)

Das Brechen said:


> @_MelissaC_
> 
> I agree with @_Yardiff Bey_ was saying(you know without the bitterness) about the group of women out there who claim to be a "strong and individual" woman yet ride the fence of traditionalism. I think it relates back to what @_android654_ was saying about women having choice of men and men being intimidated by it thus having to "shape up". I don't think that's right and it's downright confusing to me when a woman wants to be independent yet coddled like a child romantically. Not saying every woman is like this, but they are out there in droves from experience, past and current. Of course, you can always avoid these women but like I said they aren't so easy to avoid. I agree with you when you say if you aren't in the game, then you really can't complain when you lose out to somebody else.
> 
> ...


I appreciate your input, Das Brechen. I think you've helped keep this discussion level-headed. 

It must be said--not as a point of contention, but rather to bring a seldom-considered thought to light--that while it's certainly true that men with more "trinkets" get more women it's not necessarily the trinkets themselves that are the cause for that. It's easy to look out at the mating field, see that trend, and surmise (even subconsciously) that all women are gold-diggers or choose men based upon what tangible goods they can give us. 

Rather, many of the men who have impressive careers or wealth (certainly not all, mind you, but many) have accomplished such because of personal qualities that women find attractive. Yes, gold-diggers exist (just as machismo players exist). But it's kind of a cop-out to say, "Well, girls only want rich/successful guys" when maybe women like those men because they have a passion in (or a passion for) life, are responsible, or ambitious, conscientious, intelligent, etc. And those are qualities that attract women whether or not there are "trinkets" to show for them. An example are those friends I mentioned in an above post, who are quantifiable "losers" but incredibly intelligent, creative, and/or emotionally attuned (but not in a needy, overfeminized way). The existence of those qualities alone--arguably, their POTENTIAL for greatness--"won" them wives. They've just failed thus far to live up to the potential. They lack the ambition or motivation or confidence to put their talents and skills to real use in the world. So with the "demise of guys" it's not that guys lack intrinsic positive qualities or talents in this generation...it could be they assume all women are gold-diggers, or all women are thisthattheotherthing, or women don't need them the way their grandmas needed their grandpas, or any other number of points we've hit upon in this thread, I'm just a stupid guy, and therefore what's the point? At least I have my video games and porn. This also furthers the demonization of women, an attitude of "if they don't want me then fuck them". 

The point has been raised elsewhere on this thread about male entitlement, and how in the past doing the minimum in life was enough to win you a woman since that was our only means of "independence" (in a very relative sense). It was also our only means of upward mobility. So what we all have ingrained in our psyches, it seems, is that the world owes you a woman (or women) simply by virtue of being a man. And for women we're ingrained with hypergamy. "I am only as good as my husband. He is my measure of worldly success." 

So old, and so outdated, and yet so apparent in our attitudes even today. 

I think your last paragraph was spot on.


----------



## StElmosDream (May 26, 2012)

MelissaC said:


> There are many other, arguably more noble reasons guys should want to "shape up". Like providing some kind of service to the world, or advancing society, or just making this world a marginally better place in which to fart around until you die. I've met several men who are nothing short of geniuses. Intellectually they are capable of amazing things...they could (cliche alert) cure cancer, help to eradicate hunger, take part in solving the financial crisis, whatever. What do they do instead? One works at Subway, having partied away his full-ride scholarship to a prestigious university. Another drinks a lot, plays a shit ton of video games (while his wife works...as he's supposedly working on a novel, for several years now), and waxes poetic about how awesome life will be when the singularity hits. They are, in short, "losers" by any quantifiable measure outside of IQ.


In truth I don't like to judge but but it seems like these women are adding to the problem as well, as soon as they accept a 'societal bum with no definable attributes', making it seem like a mutually beneficial arrangement - in that the dominant earner Motherly protector wife is praised and the puer personality is being 'rewarded' for arrested development. I know its an ignorant counter perspective but it seems like some might class reversal of roles (leaching off a women without children to raise) as progressive compared to the culture of x years ago when men were the providers in the main... I don't personally because even Subway is a step up from doing nothing.

Your post also makes me wonder if pop culture is really helping by painting a picture of easy success on YouTube-esque talent shows (or using 'you could be the next big thing' statements) and 'success is what sells TV', as if every graduate or high School leaver should be able to achieve high salaries from just having one great idea or 'I can do anything' attitudes gleaned from the Hollywood style of ignoring a hundred failures to get 1 success.


----------



## MelissaC (May 23, 2012)

StElmosDream said:


> In truth I don't like to judge but but it seems like these women are adding to the problem as well, as soon as they accept a 'societal bum with no definable attributes', making it seem like a mutually beneficial arrangement - in that the dominant earner Motherly protector wife is praised and the puer personality being 'rewarded' for arrested development. I know its an ignorant counter perspective but it seems like some might class reversal of roles (leaching off a women without children to raise) as progressive compared to the culture of x years ago when men were the providers in the main... I don't personally because even Subway is a step from doing nothing.
> 
> Your post also makes me wonder if pop culture is really helping, by painting a picture of easy success on talent shows (or using 'you could be the next big thing' statements) and 'success is what sells TV', as if every graduate or high School leaver should be able to achieve high salaries from just having one great idea or 'I can do anything' attitudes gleaned from the Hollywood style of ignoring a hundred failures to get 1 success.


No, absolutely, you're right. It's not "judging". These guys' wives are, in a sense, enabling their "demise". They married them for their potential (which could be thought of us being "childlike"), and then adopt a motherly role toward them...working to provide for them financially, praising the IDEA of their efforts ("You would write a fantastic novel!"), etc. Then they wonder why their husbands aren't doing more with their lives. Why should they? What's the incentive? You've taken on the role of being their mother and then wonder why they act like children. It's the "Golem effect" I mentioned, and both genders are to blame for facilitating it. And yes, Subway is a step away from doing nothing, and for some people that's perhaps the best they can hope to achieve from life. Not everyone has the ability to cure cancer or ponder quantum physics. But those who do fail the world by being content to work at Subway for the rest of their lives. Harsh truth.

As far as pop culture, it's definitely not helping. If popular media is to be believed then all men really care about is beer, sports, and boobs. And so many guys buy into that and perpetuate the stereotype, thinking that they're acting "manly". 

Per entitlement in our culture, that afflicts both genders equally although sometimes in different ways. Everything should be easy and convenient. If it isn't, then fuck it. That mentality certainly contributes to this clusterfuck over masculinity.


----------



## StElmosDream (May 26, 2012)

MelissaC said:


> And yes, Subway is a step away from doing nothing, and for some people that's perhaps the best they can hope to achieve from life. Not everyone has the ability to cure cancer or ponder quantum physics. But those who do fail the world by being content to work at Subway for the rest of their lives. Harsh truth.
> 
> Per entitlement in our culture, that afflicts both genders equally although sometimes in different ways. Everything should be easy and convenient. If it isn't, then fuck it. That mentality certainly contributes to this clusterfuck over masculinity.


Truthfully its hard to tell if someone fails in dead end jobs or if business exploits this loyalty by suggesting 'if you stay with us x amount of years it is your right to manage others or be promoted', when in reality it may be idealistic to assume they will get paid what they deserve or a 2 way beautiful lie told to appease both parties*

*Makes me think of someone I knew who completed a difficult engineering degree, had managed a Zoo's technical systems and felt this entitled him to go straight into project management 'on merit alone', realising barely no one would hire without that experience so he settled in a 'tide over temp factory job', got offered full time employment (beneath his skill) and decided to wait 2+ years until management jobs might come up :sad:.


----------



## Flash FM (Aug 31, 2012)

StElmosDream said:


> Truthfully its hard to tell if someone fails in dead end jobs or if business exploits this loyalty by suggesting 'if you stay with us x amount of years it is your right to manage others or be promoted', when in reality it may be idealistic to assume they will get paid what they deserve or a 2 way beautiful lie told to appease both parties*
> 
> *Makes me think of someone I knew who completed a difficult engineering degree, had managed a Zoo's technical systems and felt this entitled him to go straight into project management 'on merit alone', realising barely no one would hire without that experience so he settled in a 'tide over temp factory job', got offered full time employment (beneath his skill) and decided to wait 2+ years until management jobs might come up :sad:.


Perhaps this acquaintance of yours copped out, or perhaps he was being realistic. After all, jobs aren't exactly falling out of the skies right now, are they? I find it so disheartening to hear of boys (I'm sure there are girls in this position as well) who have acquired some fantastic skills doing an apprenticeship, only to find that no one is hiring. I can only imagine how deflated and bitter they must feel. Is it any wonder, then, that so many of them find solace in escapist pursuits like video games or drinking? When we play games like _Call of Duty_, for example, we are in control. There's a clear objective, you achieve it, then bask in your own reflected glory. Job done. I daresay that's the only control over their lives young working-class males have. Many of the older generation might deride the young as feckless and nihilistic, but I know there are lots of youths out there who are willing to work hard for a wage but don't have the opportunity to prove themselves because employers aren't hiring. "Experience required." How does one obtain experience? 

Not that I'm saying the older generation have it any easier. After all, they're usually the ones picking up the tab when their sons can't make it in the big wide world. Many are finding they have to delay retirement to support their twenty- or thirty-something children as well as their elderly parents. Add to that rising living costs, pension funds which may or may not be enough to cover their own old age and an increased workload because their scumbag employers laid off staff but dumped all the responsibilities onto those who remain and you have yourself a very unhappy situation. This is what young people have to look forward to? Longer hours, bigger bills, getting screwed over by the Man, then the peace of the grave? I don't blame them for isolating themselves.


----------



## alexande (Jan 8, 2012)

I've been researching "The Demise of Guys" and I think this woman has brought up some interesting topics as to why men are failing.


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

i like the comparison between fast stimulation and slow building

he says the slow building is both romance and academic, which is why women are better in academics in college

of course most of us in this forum are probably well above the mean IQ and can cope pretty well


----------



## StElmosDream (May 26, 2012)

Intergalacticus said:


> Perhaps this acquaintance of yours copped out, or perhaps he was being realistic. After all, jobs aren't exactly falling out of the skies right now, are they? I find it so disheartening to hear of boys (I'm sure there are girls in this position as well) who have acquired some fantastic skills doing an apprenticeship, only to find that no one is hiring. I can only imagine how deflated and bitter they must feel. Is it any wonder, then, that so many of them find solace in escapist pursuits like video games or drinking?


Hard to tell, it was around 2008 6-9 months before the recession, yet sadly they were barely recognised in such a productivity focussed environment because they always met work targets easily and could train new staff members as well (getting paid no more for essentially doing 2-4 jobs for the price of one). It is was the same issue for someone who had already worked there for 6 years (except they were classed as 'the shift expert') but as I found the skills learned in that job were so context sensitive that they barely related to anything else (I was the typical exploited IT apprentice for a year and found the 'stop gap' experience only offered a slight advantage to get onto a Computing degree).

I agree escapism, alongside denial of sadness is easily to enable in the typical 'man cave' scenario but it seems the real issue is the absence of empathy where some seek more responsibility and to feel appreciated in life-work-free time but get told (or led to believe) that the 'Oliver Twister' scenario has to be the norm - struggle or fail but don't try asking for help (stage left, queue the opposite response if perceived as the indigent vulnerable type -same response if a physically or mentally challenged women).

*Oh dear, was just listening to theYouTube ladies view on masculinity today, so don't wish to seem bitter*


----------



## StElmosDream (May 26, 2012)

Souled In said:


> i like the comparison between fast stimulation and slow building
> 
> he says the slow building is both romance and academic, which is why women are better in academics in college
> 
> of course most of us in this forum are probably well above the mean IQ and can cope pretty well


Please elaborate further. Hard to define your desired context and worse if any potential insights you have are somehow lost.


----------



## 2GiveMyHeart2 (Jan 2, 2012)

It seems like it's not just a demise of guys, but also seems to be a demise of women as well (trying to be a powerful, dominant sex.) @_alexande_ Thankyou so much for sharing this. I've seen a recurring trend in media years ago about something on this topic and she put it in words so well that I was criticized on another forum about.


----------



## alexande (Jan 8, 2012)

@_2GiveMyHeart2_ I'm glad you enjoyed the video, she is very articulate. I have been watching a few of her videos and it seems shes a male rights activist(I didn't even know they existed lol). I found her video on marriage very applicable to myself and this thread, check it out.


----------



## Yardiff Bey (Jun 5, 2011)

MelissaC said:


> Disregarding the bitterness (no offense, but the demonization of women doesn't further this discussion in any way)...


Interesting. I stated some observations that I have seen with my own eyes. I proposed why said observations might be de-incentivising guys, and put at the end of my post in the interests of disclosure that I have gone through some pains and so have some first-hand experience of what I wrote. After further thought, I can boil it down to two statements:

1/ Lack of incentive (which is why people do things - no worthwhile outcome, no interest in doing it)

2/ Reaction to an action (like what put Neal Armstrong on the moon - or if someone punches me, I punch back)

In the very first sentence I'm labeled as being bitter, it is claimed that I am demonizing women, and because of said claim then my observations have no relevance to the discussion in any way whatsoever. Most interesting.

At any rate, it has been fascinating watching the reactions to the couple of posts I've put in here. When it comes down to it, for the past 40 years (2 generations) men have been told what women want. So they have tried to become what women want...and here is a thread with the topic "The Demise of Guys". Guys just did what they were told women wanted - apparantly that was the wrong thing to do, though, because they're now dying out (in women's eyes).

I for one am quite amused at this latest attempt to re-define what a male should be in a woman's eyes. Since the attempts of the previous two generations to make men into what women want has obviously been an abject failure - I will not be changing myself to try and suit a woman's ideas of what she wants in a man. It is quite evident that she does NOT know, or we would not be in this situation.

Good luck. /exits thread for good


----------



## Cellar Door (Jun 3, 2012)

It's really sad that things have to be this way. I hated the TED clip, that guy is an idiot, the problem isn't video games. The youtube video posted above by @alexande is spot on (the disposable male one) in that the male role has been removed from society. Guys want more than anything to be respected and to feel important in their masculinity. Not that girls don't want that too, but that is the absolute core of masculinity. 

It also made me feel really depressed about being a guy....


----------



## Kuthtuk (Jun 3, 2011)

@*MelissaC*

I agree with you that the humorous aspect of maher "rant" validates some of the bullshit he says, he's not 100% right. I personally think that marriage is an awesome thing and that if it numbs you in anyway (as anything in life) priorities have to be checked.
I ask the lovely and intelligent women that are following this thread to just bear with me and try to understand the my point of view of the question at hand.
I don't believe in equality between the sexes, I really don't, women will never be equal to men as men will never be equal to women. Each person regardless of sex has their sets of pros and cons.

1- I really think that some women are undermining their own show as some men are so scared that they are involuntarily "helping". I personally love debating with feminist on the matter cause it's really easy to bring them into contradictions. If your argument is "Women/men are better at everything" you are narrow minded and you're generalizing something so big that I guess your brain can't understand. Drawing a line in between human existence just because of the sex a person is born is like dividing colors into dark/bright, It's just sad to see ultra feminist ranting on how "they" are better than "them" as it's disgusting to see men treating women as an lesser being. To my eyes they are both wrong.

2- To me this question is just a really bad communication issue, women want respect not equality. I completely support women that want respect for better living and if that is their motif they more than deserve it. Not to prove they are better just to prove they can. Kudos to you all for that, it's a logical noble cause that will eventually rise up.


The thing is that it has grown to a paranoia. 

Like girls refusing to let the man pay for the dinner cause that implies "financial weakness"... Really? Come on, this is just over the top ignorance. I sincerely hope she dies alone abandoned by her 563 cats.

I really don't know where this will go, but I hope that if one thing must remain may that thing be chivalry. The respect a man must have towards a woman is something i'll try my best to pass on to my children. 

Demise of guys? Nah. Demise of weak people? Perhaps in a brighter future.


----------



## Solrac026 (Mar 6, 2012)

Cellar Door said:


> It's really sad that things have to be this way. I hated the TED clip, that guy is an idiot, the problem isn't video games. The youtube video posted above by @_alexande_ is spot on (the disposable male one) in that the male role has been removed from society. Guys want more than anything to be respected and to feel important in their masculinity. Not that girls don't want that too, but that is the absolute core of masculinity.
> 
> It also made me feel really depressed about being a guy....


Stop being so sensitive and definitely stop giving a fuck. Come over to the other side of the spectrum and be an asshole. This side may be just as terrible if not more, but at least you will have more women in your life since they are inclined to accept an asshole over a sensitive guy as the lesser of the two evils.


----------



## Jharaiz (Aug 11, 2012)

Farewell, sorry to have reached such a failing in topic for you @Yardiff Bey

I for one, am not redefining myself to suit woman's standards, this thread is a discussion, in which some ideas are put to rest and others receive praise, both for the purpose of redefining where men are at in psychological definition today. Its interesting to discuss anything IMO with relevance in modern society, if we don't do that who's to say we are or aren't being spoon fed or 'brainwashed' ideas from the mouths and images of people with bad motivations/ideals? Don't take things personally, its universal that we apply ourselves emotionally to *anything* or any idea whether politics/beliefs/religions and we find it hard to break past that barrier of emotional attachment in order to reveal to ourselves what the _actual truth is_.

To appropriately apply ourselves to an idea first we must break down barriers of vulnerability (see @StElmosDream first post on this thread with links to vulnerability) in order to reach an acceptable and truthful conclusion. Of course with vulnerability you must keep in mind that we're facing reality, and of course that entails accepting the truths and the inevitable laughability of our lives (because our actions are humorous sometimes, right?), like going to the gym, to get big, to get women - What an odd concept! But men apply themselves to it wholeheartedly.

Thanks for posting that @alexande, it was a great watch with some decent insights.

Pop cultures a damned problem, it seems like such a small thing, but it does have some kind of control group or influence, but I must admit I can see it in others and myself (sometimes); how easily we buy into that crap. I suppose at the end of the day for every episode of 'The Kardashians' there's an episode of 'Community', I just hope the general public stop buying into the generically successful crap that's produced. Its not a new idea that 'Controversy and hate produce more revenue than love', all we can do at the end of the day is choose which shows/ideas/media we apply ourselves to (Things like TEDtalks and shows with 'real' human beings etc), which crowds we choose to spend our time with, and which community we can openly share our ideas with (people who care vs. people who don't), and in that sense we build a community of like-minded folk to move forward into the future with, rather than fighting the crowd of people who don't care (the consumers). I suppose that in the distant or hopeful near future we could reach a global society where we share and care and openly discuss issues (like how the hell hitler convinced a nation).

But of course all of this poses one problem: It takes a lot of work, which means that men and women too, will have to shape up and cut the bullshit out of their lives to do something for others (cliche eh?). But thats a terrible idea because I'm a modern man whose life is convenient, right? Yeah fuck that, shape up men, rid the bullshit and be a man. What does that mean? Dunno, its possible that it means that you should strive to be defined by your actions, not your words. Drop your unnecessary guard, be vulnerable, show your emotions, but have the courage to 'be a man' and face your problems when they arise.


----------



## Solrac026 (Mar 6, 2012)

MelissaC said:


> This....oh man. This is the flipside of the very coin you are lamenting. AKA "Women say they want nice guys but only go out with assholes!" Flipside: "The only men who like me enough to demonstrate it in an obvious, unambiguous way are the douchey jerkoffs, and the only guys who act like men are pricks."
> 
> Both boil down to an either/or mentality. Either a guy is nice but effeminate, or he's an chauvinist prick but manly. I grow as weary of listening to nice guys whine as I am weary of come-ons by jerks.
> 
> ...


I have to say that I 100% agree with your viewpoint. As a young man starting to venture out into relationships I too found myself in the sensitive side of the spectrum. Being unsuccessful with women, I have been slowly changing my point of views and persona. I starting walking towards the middle of the spectrum and found a black abyss. How could I possibly remain both sensitive and dominant? These two cannot seemingly co-exist. So I am currently hoping to jump and make it to the other side of the gaping rift even though I realize that I have to jettison certain ideas, thoughts, and feelings about relationships.

One of the things that has been jettisoned is true caring and it has been replaced by apathy, simply not giving a fuck; a trademark of an asshole. I had to give it up because feelings incapacitate actions, especially when driven by the thought that a woman wants a confident man. You might say that one can be both confident and caring, but this depends on where your confidence comes from and I can tell you, gaining confidence is no easy task. I get my confidence by staying emotionally distant and insensitive. 

While this may preclude me from experiencing the joys of love, it also protects me from the crashing and burning. I have found this compromise to be acceptable as I'm now beginning to have more women in my life. Women might hate men who are assholes, yet they continue to reward such behavior by excluding all the sensitive males from their romantic lives.

Having said that, I'm still far from the other end of the spectrum. I hope to meet women who will restore some of my faith in their gender and help me find the middle ground because I cannot find it alone.


----------



## alexande (Jan 8, 2012)

Cellar Door said:


> It's really sad that things have to be this way. I hated the TED clip, that guy is an idiot, the problem isn't video games. The youtube video posted above by @_alexande_ is spot on (the disposable male one) in that the male role has been removed from society. Guys want more than anything to be respected and to feel important in their masculinity. Not that girls don't want that too, but that is the absolute core of masculinity.
> 
> It also made me feel really depressed about being a guy....


I don't think that psychologist was saying video games are the problem. I think he was just trying to say we would rather play video games than deal with the real world(I agree in some instances). The more I look into this subject, I do see the "male role" being removed from society. Everything we do in today's day and age has to be politically correct or we eat shit. There is definitely a double standard going on here. Being male is nothing to be depressed about there are still many benefits to being male imo. My best advice is just don't give a fuck, there is nothing we can do to change this matter.


----------



## android654 (Jan 19, 2010)

alexande said:


> The more I look into this subject, I do see the "male role" being removed from society.


That would be a good thing. Then people could start finding and fulfilling their own roles rather than desperately searching for a niche, waiting for them, hoping it would give them a purpose.



> Everything we do in today's day and age has to be politically correct or we eat shit.


That's bullshit. I'm sorry to tell you, but that's not true at all. You can be entirely counter to social norms and still be respected as a person. What does matter is how you present these things and how well thought out they are.


----------



## Das Brechen (Nov 26, 2011)

The abolishment of gender roles might be hindered by the religious dogma that people adhere to unless they amend the rules and regulations of their particular holy code. It'll take some real serious effort to reform religion than secular society I believe. I don't see it happening anytime soon, however.


----------



## BeautifulSadness (Sep 27, 2012)

I swear I'll finish reading this thread because I'd like to see where this is going, but I have to stop for this:



> Approaching random strangers is weird _no matter what their gender is_. Have you noticed that?
> There is nothing particularly threatening about approaching a good looking female. Approaching an ugly looking male with sexual thoughts on your mind is _just as difficult and weird_.


So I'm sure you just mean it's weird for _you_, right? And if not, what's weird about it? Do you ever get approached by random strangers just for the sake of conversation? Most people don't, but I know they wish it would happen more often. I know people have things they want to say, or tell about. This doesn't apply specifically to dating.

People are growing apart. I guess they don't realize the potential connection that already exists between all of us. 

And it's infuriating to see so many people like you stuck down in their tiny, dark, introverted holes, and not even _wanting_ to see the light of day. Some people just wander around like ants in a goddamn colony, never speaking to anyone outside their little circle of friends and acquaintances. I just feel bad for them, man. I really do. Also, I should know about being uncomfortable talking to people. I'm extremely introverted. Social situations have never been my most comfortable place. But I actually _enjoy_ conversing with strangers a lot. They don't know you, you don't know them, so what's the worst that could happen? There's nothing wrong with the occasional negative reaction, either. They happen, but you have to get bad reactions in order to find good ones. Are you afraid of what people will think of someone who's actually interested in them and things they have to say? Because when people find _that_ weird, they're really just projecting their insecurities. Who can be afraid of people who are displaying insecurities (my god, the irony)? 

I've talked to strangers plenty of times, now, and some of them are still good friends of mine. That wouldn't have happened if I'd just stuck to people I already know. Sometimes I met people who thought it was weird at first, but once I got them to talk about themselves, every one of them appeared interested (Lol). 

So don't limit yourself. They're only strangers because you haven't met them yet.

*Sorry for the ranting/venting.*


----------



## Cellar Door (Jun 3, 2012)

android654 said:


> That would be a good thing. Then people could start finding and fulfilling their own roles rather than desperately searching for a niche, waiting for them, hoping it would give them a purpose.
> 
> 
> 
> That's bullshit. I'm sorry to tell you, but that's not true at all. You can be entirely counter to social norms and still be respected as a person. What does matter is how you present these things and how well thought out they are.


Yeah but that's the problem, there isn't such thing as a person's "own role" for a lot of people. Some guys feel destined to perform a role in society, are able to perform it, and do perform it. These guys are probably really happy. If a guy doesn't have that it's a huge blow to is ego and self esteem. I know a lot of guys who are unemployed or underemployed due to the economy and they are extremely depressed, not only because they aren't making any/enough money but because they feel diminished as a person. Guys need some amount respect (99.99999999999% anyways) for their role. Maybe it's sexist, but it's no different than all the BS society tells guys they have to do because of women because "that's just the way they are".


----------



## Razare (Apr 21, 2009)

to the OP:

I've noticed this trend over the last 10 years. I'm not sure if it applies to me or not... I think I'd be an oddball even if the rest of the world was normal.

Modern society causes a lot of problems prevalent in our younger generations, this is just another to stack on the heap.

I think the causes are deeper than just internet, video games, and porn.

It's that what traditionally made a man, a "man" is no longer respected. I'm not talking about some modern definition of what it means to be a "man"... I'm talking about the version of man from the WWII generation. The sort of man who might have thought it appropriate to occasionally take a belt to a kid if it was called for, as a measure of discipline in the household.

The sort of man who might squeal out of a parking lot just to be a show-off.

The sort of jerk I'd never want to be.... but elements that perhaps constituted the traditional aspects of manhood.


Growing up, I was never taught to be the sort of man that was a man in the 1930's or 1940's... I was told that was wrong and that I should be something else.

Is this something else better? I think it is, but at the same time, I realize sexual instincts and mating have not evolved along with society's noble ideals.

If we're to evolve our society away from traditional behavior, that must include sex and mating also... but in large part, it doesn't. Not yet at least.


I'm not advocating one way or another, really... I'm fine with who I am and could care less if the average woman finds it attractive in the least. I'm only commenting on the disconnect between society's ideals and sexual behavior being a prevalent factor in subsequent problems of younger men.


----------



## MelissaC (May 23, 2012)

nevermore said:


> I suppose starting with gender can help, but don't you think general self-reflection might be a better way of doing this? (Since there are always exceptions to trends - yes I know when talking about men and women we talk in generalizations, but you seemed to be going for more of an individualistic approach here). It tends to be more accurate if you do it honestly (which I know is hard for people, but I still think it's the ideal).
> 
> I don't think it really matters what biological, social, genetic, hormonal, etc. factors ultimately granted you a certain set of "tools" (though it is interesting to study their scientific origins) so long as you recognize them and use them.
> 
> That said, I'm biased. I'm an INTP and as big a wannabe Feeler as they come (obvious crossover with stereotypically feminine traits there). Objectively the things I spend most of my time thinking about are a waste because they are more people-centered, but if I were to be honest I find other subjects cold and boring. That being said, I suppose I could use my innate gift for systematizing as a counselor/social advocate...as long as I'm not just dealing with systemic logic. I just find it boring to study (most) things that don't relate back to "complex emotional landscapes", as you call them. Which I suppose is probably more what you meant (when you were talking about your male nurse friends?) Combining "feminine" interests/goals/passions with innate masculine talents?


General self-reflection is always better, but sometimes we all could use a heads-up on things we should self-reflect about. I think that's where discussion comes into play. Otherwise we get tripped up much more easily over our own denial (and other defense mechanisms).

Our back and forth is interesting, what with you being a male INTP and my being a female INTJ. I totally commiserate with you, but on the complete other side of the coin. I often cringe at the generalizations used in conversations like this as well, but they're a necessary evil. I'm always searching for the lowest common denominator, and so I'm willing to accept generalizations when they're well-founded. 

So you have obvious crossover with stereotypically feminine traits, and I have obvious crossover with stereotypically masculine traits. Does it make you any less a man, or me any less a woman? It's much more multifaceted than that. You hit it right on the head with your last couple of sentences there. Having some masculine traits/interests/goals/passions/hobbies does not negate the innate feminine traits I was born with, for example (although I've been known to deny such rather vehemently in the past). My femininity is expressed in its own way...individually. And it took a lot of self-reflection to reach this point on a journey that's really hardly started. Perhaps it's why I'm so interested and feel somewhat invested in this issue of the "new" masculinity. I think I'm getting pretty...esoteric here so I'll stop. 

But yeah, that was what I meant when I referred to my male nurse friends. Even when doing "feminine" things such as comforting the actively dying, or caring for sick children, etc, they do so utilizing their masculine strengths. If you were to watch a woman speak gently to someone dying of cancer it looks different than a man doing the same, although they are equally effective. Likewise, a female nurse is more likely to "baby talk" and express sympathy with a sick kid, whereas male nurses are more likely to use therapeutic distraction, or try to make the kid laugh. Both are effective, but different. And yeah, part of it is how men are raised ("feelings don't matter"), but part of it is also an innate male mentality to DO things rather than simply be an emotional presence. Like with dying people... a male nurse will (generally, as always) tend to do things to make the person more comfortable, like repositioning, or medicine, or adjusting pillows. They also tend to ask more questions and keep the conversation more concrete (I've heard things like, "What was your favorite vacation?" and "What holiday was always your favorite?"). Female nurses tend to (again, generally) simply sit there, provide physical comforting touch (holding a hand), and listen to and cry with the patient. Different approaches, but in the end the patient dies knowing someone cared with either one. 

I guess I'm trying really hard to drive this point home because I tire of women asking men to think more like they do, and I feel incredibly sad for guys who think of themselves as "stupid" simply because they think differently and have a different set of innate strengths. You could get a job dealing with the most complex emotional landscapes around, but at the end of the day you'd still approach it as a man.


----------



## alexande (Jan 8, 2012)

nevermore said:


> He mentions men having constantly low testosterone levels nowadays (for various reasons) which means we are constantly having to recharge (hence the "man cave")...but can never seem to get to optimum levels. Without the drive testosterone gives us, many of us are lazy and unmotivated. He mentions something to do with men being energy conservationists, exerting as little energy as needed to get something done, always calibrating new ways to use less energy to tackle something and still getting away with it. (I know I can relate to that!)


I'm quite lazy(although very physically active) and unmotivated; my testosterone levels are through the roof. This could be the cause in some men but I don't think it would be a general consensus.


----------



## Carmine Ermine (Mar 11, 2012)

I just need to finish these 3 computer games then I can go out and meet women...


----------



## android654 (Jan 19, 2010)

I find it funny that people blame their shortcomings on factors outside of themselves. How long can someone keep that up? How long can they blame their inadequacies on society and the lack of respect they're owed by simply being alive? How can you even call an existence like that to be a life worth living?


----------



## The Frozen One (Oct 10, 2012)

This is a documentary that the CBC did called The Disappearing Male. It discusses how chemicals are affecting males in masculinity, sexual desire and the reduction in number of males being born in comparison to females. It's worth a look.

The Disappearing Male : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive


----------



## Das Brechen (Nov 26, 2011)

We have to look at the parties and factors involved in cultivating a herd mentality. That is assuming a collectivist attitude is "wrong" and we assume an individualistic approach is "right". I think it's a myriad of things at work here and it'll take some time to sort these things out. Of course, it's on the individual to draw this source of inspiration from himself right? I think we moved so far from what society was designed to do and has become the monster that some now condemn and generations distance themselves from while passing the buck.

We have it now and we need to redefine what society is supposed to do for us. Maybe better yet, what we can do to strengthen the bonds in society since we all are affected in one way or another. I believe in personal accoutablity but I can't deny, at least in my case, what seems to be innate for me to account for others who affect my everyday life. 

That whole "I am my brother's keeper" type of thing. It's not a popular opinion but it's out there.


----------



## Razare (Apr 21, 2009)

android654 said:


> I find it funny that people blame their shortcomings on factors outside of themselves. How long can someone keep that up? How long can they blame their inadequacies on society and the lack of respect they're owed by simply being alive? How can you even call an existence like that to be a life worth living?


If I use myself as an example, I would take full responsibility.

I would encourage all men who find themselves in a situation that's been described to take responsibility as well.

Yet if we're dealing with a structural problem in society, the answer cannot be as simple as, "Suck it up." On a personal level, this works but the problem will persist, unless we deal with its causes.

When children become more obese than they used to be, on an individual level, we can tell those children or teenagers to suck it up and start taking responsibility for their lifestyle... yet as a society we must also realize that something we're doing is causing this... whether it be the food additives or lack of exercise we afford our children.

So if we find ourselves in a situation where we have to, "Suck it up," and take responsibility... this means the problem has already occurred and we're dealing with the aftermath... as opposed to preventing it in the first place.


----------



## android654 (Jan 19, 2010)

Razare said:


> If I use myself as an example, I would take full responsibility.
> 
> I would encourage all men who find themselves in a situation that's been described to take responsibility as well.
> 
> ...


All of this is nice, but it doesn't explain why fixed gender roles are necessary or would address the problem of men. If we're being frank, the only way to make men happy and respected by simply being men again, we would have to lower the quality of life for women, kill the concept of individuality and perhaps put an end to globalization. I doubt many would agree that that is a good thing. 

In the end the only solution is for people to abandon old forms of thinking and address their own issues.


----------



## Razare (Apr 21, 2009)

android654 said:


> All of this is nice, but it doesn't explain why fixed gender roles are necessary or would address the problem of men.
> 
> In the end the only solution is for people to abandon old forms of thinking and address their own issues.


I'm not advocating men return to traditional behavior, nor society.

I'm saying we should find a solution and work our families and society toward it... maybe the solution does involve abandoning gender roles?

But you see if men are to abandon something they're innately wired for sociologically or genetically, then that natural behavior must be channeled in some new way that's positive as opposed to negative.


----------



## StElmosDream (May 26, 2012)

Razare said:


> I'm not advocating men return to traditional behavior, nor society.
> 
> I'm saying we should find a solution and work our families and society toward it... maybe the solution does involve abandoning gender roles?
> 
> But you see if men are to abandon something they're innately wired for sociologically or genetically, then that natural behavior must be channeled in some new way that's positive as opposed to negative.


Something like this: SolarMovie but more realistic would be nice or better yet improving social conditioning where children and adults aren't made to think genders are different (opposites or shared competencies seems fairer*). It has always confused me why genders must be segregated when they discuss similar topics in different ways** and could benefit more from unisex toilets or changing rooms (with walled cubicles of course and predator safeguards).

*This could start with giving children more choice of unisex toys or letting people decide their own interests without defining 'boys hobbies' or 'girls joys' and continuing with emotional intelligence coaching classes with mixed genders (as some US schools already offer but not too many so far) to break down 'us and them' mentalities instilled by the age of 11.

**The Samaritans was even founded based upon the idea of women and Mothers coffee mornings, where people could chat informally about life, issues, shared interests and offer non judgemental understanding - maybe even offering new insights.


----------



## android654 (Jan 19, 2010)

Razare said:


> I'm not advocating men return to traditional behavior, nor society.
> 
> I'm saying we should find a solution and work our families and society toward it... maybe the solution does involve abandoning gender roles?
> 
> But you see if men are to abandon something they're innately wired for sociologically or genetically, then that natural behavior must be channeled in some new way that's positive as opposed to negative.


And again, there's no way to redefine an entire segment of the population without radically shifting society. So, as it stands right now, there are only two options, go back to social norms that are worse for everyone else or having people be responsible for themselves. Shifts in culture take centuries to take place. It's taken us 200+ years in America to get women this far, and they still aren't on equal footing with men.


----------



## MelissaC (May 23, 2012)

android654 said:


> And again, there's no way to redefine an entire segment of the population without radically shifting society. So, as it stands right now, there are only two options, go back to social norms that are worse for everyone else or having people be responsible for themselves. Shifts in culture take centuries to take place. It's taken us 200+ years in America to get women this far, and they still aren't on equal footing with men.


(Along with original quote from @Razare )

I think you both have valid points, and don't see how they oppose each other. "But you see if men are to abandon something they're innately wired for sociologically or genetically, then that natural behavior must be channeled in some new way that's positive as opposed to negative." That's something that must be accomplished on both an individual and collective level. I think we've touched rather heavily on the individual aspects of it--self-reflection and whatnot--but only lightly on the collective. A lack of positive male role models in the media comes immediately to mind. Even then, it all starts on an individual level. People being responsible for themselves would in itself redefine masculinity.


----------



## Das Brechen (Nov 26, 2011)

android654 said:


> And again, there's no way to redefine an entire segment of the population without radically shifting society. So, as it stands right now, there are only two options, go back to social norms that are worse for everyone else or having people be responsible for themselves. Shifts in culture take centuries to take place. It's taken us 200+ years in America to get women this far, and they still aren't on equal footing with men.


I disagree in part that men and women aren't equal. I agree that there are still some disparities out there but for the most part, men and women can live their lives relatively free of open prejudice. I think through indoctrination, we have seen the aggressive male behavior become frowned upon in the workplace and some areas of the social arena. I don't know about you, but I have gone through as part of my job many "sensitivity" workshops about code of conduct in the workplace. There is an amazing gap between what the social media portrays men to be and what professional life demands of them.

I think it was stated earlier that women don't need men anymore in this day and age. They can choose from the higher stock of men now and not forced into a dowry, right? That's a radical change in a couple decades, wouldn't you say so?

But my main question is what do you propose to get people to just start taking responsibility? Do you believe they have the moral integrity to police themselves?


----------



## android654 (Jan 19, 2010)

Das Brechen said:


> I disagree in part that men and women aren't equal. I agree that there are still some disparities out there but for the most part, men and women can live their lives relatively free of open prejudice. I think through indoctrination, we have seen the aggressive male behavior become frowned upon in the workplace and some areas of the social arena. I don't know about you, but I have gone through as part of my job many "sensitivity" workshops about code of conduct in the workplace. There is an amazing gap between what the social media portrays men to be and what professional life demands of them.
> 
> I think it was stated earlier that women don't need men anymore in this day and age. They can choose from the higher stock of men now and not forced into a dowry, right? That's a radical change in a couple decades, wouldn't you say so?
> 
> But my main question is what do you propose to get people to just start taking responsibility? Do you believe they have the moral integrity to police themselves?


You need to take another look at western society. As a man I've got a lot more opportunities open to me simply because I'm a man. There are many things I can do, in a social setting, that wont lead my peers to look down on me because of it. A lot of woman can not claim the same.

whether you realize it or not, you police yourself all the time. Your experience and your perspective color your actions, decisions and plans all the time. The ratio of fixed gender roles and personal choice is malleable and if you so desired you could define yourself entirely by your own choosing.


----------



## Das Brechen (Nov 26, 2011)

android654 said:


> You need to take another look at western society. As a man I've got a lot more opportunities open to me simply because I'm a man. There are many things I can do, in a social setting, that wont lead my peers to look down on me because of it. A lot of woman can not claim the same.
> 
> whether you realize it or not, you police yourself all the time. Your experience and your perspective color your actions, decisions and plans all the time. The ratio of fixed gender roles and personal choice is malleable and if you so desired you could define yourself entirely by your own choosing.


As someone who has grown up in Western society, I'm very well aware of how it works. I guess we are just not going to agree on this topic and that's okay. I respect your opinion and I actually think you make some sense in most cases.

I understand the stigma is there and does it influence decisions at times? Yes, it does. For the most part, I see women getting hired all the time at my office and in those professional settings I have seen them get promoted. Sometimes it was merited and other times it was questionable. As far as the social arena goes, you are right. As a man, there are some things I can get away with. Same goes for a woman, there are things she can get away with. Of course, she can be scrutinized especially when it comes to sexual purity. I think that's the major thing in the social area. A woman is independent and strong, flexes her sexual desires comes off as "easy". Is that right? No. Does it happen? Yes, it does. But it doesn't stop her from living her life and flexing those desires.

Yes, we all police ourselves. Rational, mentally healthy people can do that. I can't sit here and say that people accepted civil rights with open arms. That was a point in history where people should've began to just be responsible, but did it happen right away? It took time and many, many media sources, government programs, and social events to curb that old way of thinking. Even still today, people feel differently about the subject and because it was generally forced onto the masses, it became normal.

So what reason do people have to just be responsible? In this postmodern world, apathy is at an all time high. It won't be easy but it's not impossible.


----------



## android654 (Jan 19, 2010)

Das Brechen said:


> A woman is independent and strong, flexes her sexual desires comes off as "easy". Is that right? No. Does it happen? Yes, it does. But it doesn't stop her from living her life and flexing those desires.


There. You answered your own question right there. She does what she wants with no regard for the perceptions others will form of her. That's something that can only be learned through adversity, and when it comes to genders, women are the ones who had to work against social norms. The only difference is now men have to do the same and are afraid to.


----------



## Das Brechen (Nov 26, 2011)

android654 said:


> There. You answered your own question right there. She does what she wants with no regard for the perceptions others will form of her. That's something that can only be learned through adversity, and when it comes to genders, women are the ones who had to work against social norms. The only difference is now men have to do the same and are afraid to.


But it raises some questions, in my opinion. If men have to work hard against social norms, which men have to work at it? The fading alpha male or the sensitive types? What part of that is equality? Where do we draw the line? What happens when women start to abuse their rising position in society? It happens all the time and no one says anything about it. It opens a can of worms because as someone who has traveled all over North America, I find that the attitudes of women differ slightly on a general scale. I find there are three categories of women on this topic: women want total indepedence, women who want traditional values, and women who want both. How do you remedy that? Like you said, women are going against the norm and not giving a flying fig. The move also alienates the other catergories. We have been conditioned to think the first category is right and forget everyone else. We're on this train and I don't see it stopping anytime soon as it steamrolls all preexisting norms.


----------



## android654 (Jan 19, 2010)

Das Brechen said:


> But it raises some questions, in my opinion. If men have to work hard against social norms, which men have to work at it? The fading alpha male or the sensitive types? What part of that is equality? Where do we draw the line? What happens when women start to abuse their rising position in society? It happens all the time and no one says anything about it. It opens a can of worms because as someone who has traveled all over North America, I find that the attitudes of women differ slightly on a general scale. I find there are three categories of women on this topic: women want total indepence, women who want traditional values, and women who want both. How do you remedy that? Like you said, women are going against the norm and not giving a flying fig. The move also alienates the other catergories. We have been conditioned to think the first category is right and forget everyone else. We're on this train and I don't see it stopping anytime soon as it steamrolls all preexisting norms.


You're asking all the wrong questions. Why do we need some men to pave the way for other men? If we do that we might as well do nothing at all, we'll be right back where we started in no time. There's only one key to happiness and that's to be yourself. You can't do that if you're always defining yourself in the shadow of others.


----------



## Das Brechen (Nov 26, 2011)

android654 said:


> You're asking all the wrong questions. Why do we need some men to pave the way for other men? If we do that we might as well do nothing at all, we'll be right back where we started in no time. There's only one key to happiness and that's to be yourself. You can't do that if you're always defining yourself in the shadow of others.


I'm saying that people's values get steamrolled in the "interests" of the "greater good". If you're okay with that, fine. That's your opinion. I just don't agree with that "I'm right, you're wrong" approach and it's what got us into this mess in the first place. I disagree with that last statement. This is just me, I feel there are many roads to happiness. Also, if you consider America's last few generations, they've all had the prevailing norms of the previous to counter and progress upon. I can't say with certainty that we would still hold the opinion that ceratain generations were greater than others without that stark contrast. So it's all a matter of how we begin to construct our identity. We can't do it on our own without some kind of working model.


----------

