you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (4 children)

You really need to expand your knowledge of the world. What is the case in the US or UK is far from the universal norm.

Okay but how is giving women who already have female privilege even more special treatment going to change what happens in other countries?

I'm sorry if this was the case in the social milieu in which you grew up. It's certainly not the norm universally. In the family I grew up in, my father, grandad and uncles were by far the biggest criers. None of my many male friends were beaten to a pulp for crying. They weren't beaten, shamed or punished at all for crying. Same goes for my sons and all their friends.

This was back in the olden days. I thankfully didn't grow up in that environment, but I still faced the threat of more minor punishments if I cried. Or didn't level up to the high standards set on me. And it still affects me, because society scolds men for showing any weakness. We're severely underdiagnosed with depression because people treat it like we're expected to deal with it, even though it's the end of the world if a woman gets it. If I cry, I am accused of being a spoiled brat and manipulating people. If a woman cries she's coddled and validated beyond reason. Because I'm a mean ugly man, and she's a gorgeous innocent female with sparkly eyes. Even social norms are like this. Women can do pretty much whatever they want no problem. But men have to fit the stereotype of man who works 9 to 5, has a wife and 2.5 kids, and is obsessed with sports and sex, and has no emotion at all, otherwise we're casted out. And it's all because women are inherently valuable just for existing, whereas men are only as valuable as what they do for women and children and working.

[–]MarkTwainiac 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

This was back in the olden days.

Wow, that's some ageism, mate. The statement I made that you quoted covered male people born in the US from the 1890s through the late 1990s.

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (2 children)

How the fuck is that ageist? It's a known fact that most adults were physically abusive to children until recently. And that doesn't mean they were sadists, because they faced enormous pressure to keep their kids in line and this is what they were told to do, especially to boys. That doesn't imply that they are like that just because of their age.

[–]MarkTwainiac 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

You said the experiences of the people in the USA of multi generations over more than 100 years I cited all occurred

back in the olden days.

That's ageism. You seem to think that only people of your own age/generation and very narrow experience and specific cultural milieu count and constitute the norm.

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Are you saying we should take action to solve problems for a completely different time period? That doesn't make any sense.