Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 5/11/2024 at 5:51 AM, BetterWithCheddar said:

@AwakeEnergyScouter, do you really see a lot of damage and suffering caused by men who cling to traditional gender roles? Can you provide an example? I do believe there is such thing as "toxic masculinity" (where one's narrow focus on perceived masculine attributes becomes a net negative on society or their personal relationships), but men embracing the traditional "provider" role is still largely a good thing. Think of how many of today's problems could be solved by a present father who ensured his children were housed, clothed, and fed. I view the lack of masculinity as the greater pitfall.

** And to be clear, my wife and I have a lot of strengths and interests that follow traditional gender roles and some that don't. Every couple is different and that's OK. This isn't some weird flex on my part. I'm not particularly handy, I drive an old Camry, and would take a margarita over a beer. I do, however, earn enough to pay our bills, save a little for retirement, and occasionally buy a sweet Lego set. 🙂

I find it interesting - and I don't mean strange or wrong, but literally interesting - that you ask a woman for examples of how traditional gender role expectations hurt men even though another man just gave a whole list with a lot of passion. Because I'm not one, all my examples are going to be second-hand, parroting back what I've heard or seen men say about their own lives. My personal contribution can only be checking that what they're saying is consistent with what I see from the outside. Why ask me, not @Eagle94-A1, when he's the one arguing that I underestimate the problem? I did find a short rundown that seems to summarize a lot of what I've heard, although I notice that it lacks the 'losing everything' type problems that Eagle94-A1 brought up: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/articles/202303/the-state-of-todays-male-psyche

I'll note that while the male gender role makes it harder to connect with others, it's also not really the case that all women are totally fluent with recognizing their own emotions and talking to others about them, either. Brené Brown's legendary (at least among agilists) TED talk on the importance of vulnerability for connection includes her personal struggle with being vulnerable, for example. But our gender role doesn't make whatever personal hurdle we have taller and steeper.

I do agree that two-parent households work better than one-parent households just based on adult-to-child ratio. I don't have a lot of opinions about any lack of masculinity in part because I don't know what you mean by masculinity exactly. It's one of those words used by a lot of people to mean a lot of things. I suspect you and I have pretty similar ideas of what a 'real man' is like, at least compared to the people who take toxic masculinity way too seriously. I routinely hear men who I find quite masculine called not masculine by others and rarely with a kind spirit, so... Without some kind of working definition of masculinity I don't really want to wade into that.

Now, I think I should say something about what is not a problem in addition to what is, namely natural and authentic overlap between one individual's way of being and interests and traditional gender roles. While gender roles are made up (i e socially constructed), they do connect to patterns of behavior. The key issue for me is freedom to choose how to live your life.

I suppose, strictly speaking, that the problem isn't the abstract existence of gender roles but that some (actually a lot of) people use them as a hammer to force people to live a certain way. The toxic masculinity and femininity problems are the folks who hide their insecurities behind a gender role wall. ("You can't criticize me because I'm the perfect man/woman!") But there's also a more subtle (but also much more common) level of basically pleasant but somewhat (or even very) unhappy people who don't feel like they can openly be who they are on all the points that don't live up their gender role 100%. And let's face it, that's most of us! Few people totally embody stereotypical maleness or femaleness, and that's ok. The male and female gender roles hammer people differently, but the basic problem is being hammered in the first place. 

I've been called a lesbian (I'm straight) and/or masculine for liking STEM. Good effort hammering there, but since I'm cishet and traditionally feminine presenting it's pretty obvious that the people trying to hammer are the ones with the problem, not me, especially because us girls and women in STEM seem to have no problems whatsoever finding partners. There are plenty of men who want a smart woman with high earning potential.

Like you and your wife, my husband and I conform to traditional gender roles in some ways but not others, and, well... Doesn't every couple? Like you say, every couple is different and should be allowed to make things work however the two of them (or the n of them, whatever, same principle) please. If that confirms to traditional gender roles, fine. If it doesn't, also fine. The question that matters is "does this work in practice?"

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 78
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

After talking to a professional recently, the writing in the wall that the "trial" period of 8/24-7/25 will be successful and full integration will occur. Also from the discussion, if you do not go co

To acquire Venturers in any significant number, the registration fee will have to be less than the cost of a pizza and a movie. While we’re rumoring, scuttle but says there are co-Ed troops being pi

"Normalizing" is not always a good thing.  

14 minutes ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

I find it interesting - and I don't mean strange or wrong, but literally interesting - that you ask a woman for examples of how traditional gender role expectations hurt men even though another man just gave a whole list with a lot of passion. Because I'm not one, all my examples are going to be second-hand, parroting back what I've heard or seen men say about their own lives. My personal contribution can only be checking that what they're saying is consistent with what I see from the outside. Why ask me, not @Eagle94-A1, when he's the one arguing that I underestimate the problem? I did find a short rundown that seems to summarize a lot of what I've heard, although I notice that it lacks the 'losing everything' type problems that Eagle94-A1 brought up: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/articles/202303/the-state-of-todays-male-psyche

I'll note that while the male gender role makes it harder to connect with others, it's also not really the case that all women are totally fluent with recognizing their own emotions and talking to others about them, either. Brené Brown's legendary (at least among agilists) TED talk on the importance of vulnerability for connection includes her personal struggle with being vulnerable, for example. But our gender role doesn't make whatever personal hurdle we have taller and steeper.

I do agree that two-parent households work better than one-parent households just based on adult-to-child ratio. I don't have a lot of opinions about any lack of masculinity in part because I don't know what you mean by masculinity exactly. It's one of those words used by a lot of people to mean a lot of things. I suspect you and I have pretty similar ideas of what a 'real man' is like, at least compared to the people who take toxic masculinity way too seriously. I routinely hear men who I find quite masculine called not masculine by others and rarely with a kind spirit, so... Without some kind of working definition of masculinity I don't really want to wade into that.

Now, I think I should say something about what is not a problem in addition to what is, namely natural and authentic overlap between one individual's way of being and interests and traditional gender roles. While gender roles are made up (i e socially constructed), they do connect to patterns of behavior. The key issue for me is freedom to choose how to live your life.

I suppose, strictly speaking, that the problem isn't the abstract existence of gender roles but that some (actually a lot of) people use them as a hammer to force people to live a certain way. The toxic masculinity and femininity problems are the folks who hide their insecurities behind a gender role wall. ("You can't criticize me because I'm the perfect man/woman!") But there's also a more subtle (but also much more common) level of basically pleasant but somewhat (or even very) unhappy people who don't feel like they can openly be who they are on all the points that don't live up their gender role 100%. And let's face it, that's most of us! Few people totally embody stereotypical maleness or femaleness, and that's ok. The male and female gender roles hammer people differently, but the basic problem is being hammered in the first place. 

I've been called a lesbian (I'm straight) and/or masculine for liking STEM. Good effort hammering there, but since I'm cishet and traditionally feminine presenting it's pretty obvious that the people trying to hammer are the ones with the problem, not me, especially because us girls and women in STEM seem to have no problems whatsoever finding partners. There are plenty of men who want a smart woman with high earning potential.

Like you and your wife, my husband and I conform to traditional gender roles in some ways but not others, and, well... Doesn't every couple? Like you say, every couple is different and should be allowed to make things work however the two of them (or the n of them, whatever, same principle) please. If that confirms to traditional gender roles, fine. If it doesn't, also fine. The question that matters is "does this work in practice?"

I had to go looking to make sure I understood the terminology used.  Admittedly, I was not cognizant of the definintion of cisnet and its related terms.  Perhaps they are more precise in the current atmosphere, but I am not sure that they may also play into the greater confusion so many seem to have.  Most of the confusions and conflict appears, to me anyway, to simply be that emotions that once were sublimated are now often expected to be shared, even when the person with them is still confused and not sure about it.  Are we as a society, here in the U.S. at least, too conflicted within to allow others to deal on their own terms?  Are we threatened somehow?  E.G.; I have never understood why some push the issue in religion versus atheism.  It is a play on words to me, as the definition of atheism contradicts itself in my view.  Still, much of the legal wrangling on that front relates to someone "feeling oppressed" by simply having to on occasion see a cross or other religious symbol, and so insists that their right to not be conflicted by a symbol overrides that of those who use or represent that symbol.  I always wonder why they are threatened, as they simply can not look, or ignore it.  Again though, what we once called "common sense" is a vague, almost non existent thing now.  

     Even more sadly, we seem to add to the confusion with too many young people just because we are roiled ourselves emotionally.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

I find it interesting - and I don't mean strange or wrong, but literally interesting - that you ask a woman for examples of how traditional gender role expectations hurt men even though another man just gave a whole list with a lot of passion.

Apologies, @AwakeEnergyScouter - I see were referring to internalized suffering that was mentioned in another post, which I have no problem believing is real (I think we can all relate to some degree). I initially read your post to mean suffering by society from the outward projection of masculinity (also real, but debatable IMHO). I tagged you simply because I thought you've added a lot of thoughtful replies and I've enjoyed engaging with you in this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BetterWithCheddar said:

Apologies, @AwakeEnergyScouter - I see were referring to internalized suffering that was mentioned in another post, which I have no problem believing is real (I think we can all relate to some degree). I initially read your post to mean suffering by society from the outward projection of masculinity (also real, but debatable IMHO). I tagged you simply because I thought you've added a lot of thoughtful replies and I've enjoyed engaging with you in this thread.

Oh, I see! That makes sense. I was a little surprised that you wouldn't have noticed at all. I also appreciate your willingness to explain your thinking process in several steps, and your thoughtfulness. I've enjoyed talking to you, too. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...