Why does criticism of sexism only focus on the women?

[ChelseaGuy]

For example, going by one of the previous-made threads on here, I see whenever people criticize sexism in the Bible or churches (and all other areas too) there is an unfair biased focus on the women. The thinking is that it's only women that were oppressed or had things bad and that men had everything very good. That is not the truth.

 

There are things that suck/sucked about being a man too:

• Men and boys are supposed to feel guilty for being attracted and looking with "lustful eyes" at women in religion and ironically, secular society too.
• Males live shorter lives compared to females and are also more likely to be born and affected with disabilities and conditions like Down Syndrome, autism, cerebral palsy...
• More men are depressed or lonely than women, also dudes have a harder time getting sex or partners than women, and are also more likely to be seen as "creepy".
• There are more points than I can list succinctly. Thing is about all of them, society doesn't really care or is actually hostile.

[Myrkhoos]

Hello, 

 

      On that note I just heard of a book The Second Sexism by David Benatar, south african philosopher more known for his work on antinatalism.

      I think the issue is more complex but the focus on the oppression of women comes from the fact that in general they were denied institutionalized leading power - in the family, the state or the religion. Leadership roles were asigned to men in the Bible and even now the more traditional churches/society assign institutional leadership to men only.

      However , recently it has come to my attention and mind that it us quite fishy to consider power a good in itself. In the Eastern Orthodox tradition there are many references to the awesome responsability of leadership roles and how saintly people wanted to avoid them because a mistake of a leader brought upon him much more punishment in the afterlife than a subject. Much more glory of course and sometimes they could abuse that power.

      But powerful positions also brought many problems like more attempts of assasinations for the kings, etc.

        Anyway you have to define sexism. Sexism, if it is to mean anything, to me, is the unwarranted discrimination/expectations based on sex. Because there are waranted discriminations. Like pregnancy care for women but not for men. 

      A society that enforces strict inflexible and unreflexive sex roles will be sexist usually. And you cannot solve JUST sexism towards women without sexism in general. Sexism towards men and sexism towards women are highly connected.

    For example take domestic violence. Most of the victims are females. But a lot of the male perpetrators were never taught or allowed to express emotion as sadness , anger, fear except in form of aggresive violence and were castigated for being "pussies" or cry babies if they tried. Even by other women. A psychotherapist in my country told me that parents are much more reluctant to bring their boys than their girls to psychotherapy.

     And in many ancient warlike societies which was 99 percent of ancient society , institutional power = military power. And without modern technology and childcare duties, women were in a much weaker position overall. I am almost sure that without modern technology feminism like the modern strand would be quasi impossible. And remember that in those ages overpopulation of the planet was seldom a problem, and deaths by medical issues we consider minor like infections were common so having and raising children was of the utnost importance for the continuation of society.

 

[Wertbag]

One problem I see is trying to fit all men into one category.  There is very little that can be said to be experienced by all men, everywhere, equally.  You are comparing the poor peasant farmer to the Emperor of Rome. As both are men they both must be part of the patriarchy.  The Queen of England is at a disadvantage compared to the trailer park drug addict, cos he's a man.  Stereotyping is bad and almost always wrong.   

 

The privilege that actually matters is wealth and power.  For a lot of history many women have been blocked from acquiring wealth, and therefore limited in their power.  Likewise men who grow up with no wealth, lack power and will equally struggle in life.  Since 1950 there have been 75 countries lead by a woman and currently there are 29 countries with a female leader.  In the Western world women can educate in any subject, are seen equally under the law, can hold any position and rise to be the foremost experts in any field.  Its not perfect and it never will be, but the advancement that society has made is dramatic.  Today is the best time to be alive and the most equality we've ever had.  We can only hope the rest of the world eventually follow suit, but religion will probably stop that from ever occurring globally. 

 

In my family my wife earns considerably more than me.  She has higher level education and could progress to high corporate levels if she wishes (the stress and lack of work/life balance puts her off).  She has not suffered discrimination or been disadvantaged over her male co-workers.  Maybe that is atypical around the world, but I think its probably closer to the norm, in that those women who are getting it done and progressing their careers aren't the ones making the noise and complaining.  The media focus on the loudest feminists which can give a lop sided view that their personal experience is globally the same.  A woman saying "I'm fine, thanks" is not news, but one saying "Patriarchy!  They are all against me!" makes for drama.

[Myrkhoos]

8 hours ago, Wertbag said:

One problem I see is trying to fit all men into one category.  There is very little that can be said to be experienced by all men, everywhere, equally.  You are comparing the poor peasant farmer to the Emperor of Rome. As both are men they both must be part of the patriarchy.  The Queen of England is at a disadvantage compared to the trailer park drug addict, cos he's a man.  Stereotyping is bad and almost always wrong.   

 

The privilege that actually matters is wealth and power.  For a lot of history many women have been blocked from acquiring wealth, and therefore limited in their power.  Likewise men who grow up with no wealth, lack power and will equally struggle in life.  Since 1950 there have been 75 countries lead by a woman and currently there are 29 countries with a female leader.  In the Western world women can educate in any subject, are seen equally under the law, can hold any position and rise to be the foremost experts in any field.  Its not perfect and it never will be, but the advancement that society has made is dramatic.  Today is the best time to be alive and the most equality we've ever had.  We can only hope the rest of the world eventually follow suit, but religion will probably stop that from ever occurring globally. 

 

In my family my wife earns considerably more than me.  She has higher level education and could progress to high corporate levels if she wishes (the stress and lack of work/life balance puts her off).  She has not suffered discrimination or been disadvantaged over her male co-workers.  Maybe that is atypical around the world, but I think its probably closer to the norm, in that those women who are getting it done and progressing their careers aren't the ones making the noise and complaining.  The media focus on the loudest feminists which can give a lop sided view that their personal experience is globally the same.  A woman saying "I'm fine, thanks" is not news, but one saying "Patriarchy!  They are all against me!" makes for drama.

I agree. I would only say that altough women could not acquire wealth or power themselves historically they WOULD HAVE enjoyed the power and wealth of their families. As you said, the wife of a nobleman was vastly higher in rank than a peasant man. 

      And it would be naive to think women did not influence men in their highest political decisions altough not always recorded by history. Just because they did not hold official power does not mean they did not hold ANY power whatsoever, even if it was lower.

[Guest freedwoman]

On 5/9/2020 at 10:38 PM, ChelseaGuy said:

For example, going by one of the previous-made threads on here, I see whenever people criticize sexism in the Bible or churches (and all other areas too) there is an unfair biased focus on the women. The thinking is that it's only women that were oppressed or had things bad and that men had everything very good. That is not the truth.

 

There are things that suck/sucked about being a man too:

• Men and boys are supposed to feel guilty for being attracted and looking with "lustful eyes" at women in religion and ironically, secular society too.
• Males live shorter lives compared to females and are also more likely to be born and affected with disabilities and conditions like Down Syndrome, autism, cerebral palsy...
• More men are depressed or lonely than women, also dudes have a harder time getting sex or partners than women, and are also more likely to be seen as "creepy".
• There are more points than I can list succinctly. Thing is about all of them, society doesn't really care or is actually hostile.

Sorry. I am very outspoken on how bad sexism is to men and boys. I don't demonize men for who they are. I can't imagine how hard it must be to be expected to fight in war and get permanently injured or die. The pressure of being expected to hold your families life in your hands. Working back breaking deadly labor jobs. Solving all the world's problems. Being expected to fix everything that breaks. Being unappreciated for being a single father. Suffering with diseases and sicknesses more than women. The work place isn't even fair to you men either. You have to do all your work and some of the women's work and still only get paid the same. Idiots insult men child care workers and nurses. If a man loves children idiots call him a pedophile. Poor Michael Jackson was falsely accused of that. Men aren't allowed to cry or talk about how they feel. Which pisses me off because 80% of suicides are committed by men. Abused boyfriends and husbands are crapped on. But when a man finally has enough and fights back in self defense he's accused of being a woman beater. If he tells a woman she's beautiful he's called a creepy rapist. If he loses  to a woman in combat sports he's hated by people and called a pussy. If he wins he's still called a pussy because he only beat a woman. Men can't even look the way they want to. Men are accused of being evil all the time. You built the world and most people don't appreciate you for it.  If women ran the world I don't think they could make it any better. Nice men get walked on, unless you're Brian Shaw. Men aren't given enough respect in first world nation's like they should be. You're not war machines. You're not robots. You're not evil by default. You are human. Sorry your treated like crap. Sorry your suffering goes unnoticed. It's not much but you fellas have my respect.

[Guest freedwoman]

Also I don't kiss men's asses. I am just fair and egalitarian enough to respect what they've done and continue to do. I don't worship them. I don't worship anything.  Like I said my respect and love is platonic anyway. I don't need or want sex or anything. I like being single, childless, and s.t.d. free. I won't fight women for men. I'm not in competition. Just stating facts and what I think about this. 

[Guest freedwoman]

https://avoiceformen.com/

 

 

[Guest freedwoman]

Gotta go.

[ChelseaGuy]

14 hours ago, freedwoman said:

Sorry. I am very outspoken on how bad sexism is to men and boys. I don't demonize men for who they are. I can't imagine how hard it must be to be expected to fight in war and get permanently injured or die. The pressure of being expected to hold your families life in your hands. Working back breaking deadly labor jobs. Solving all the world's problems. Being expected to fix everything that breaks. Being unappreciated for being a single father. Suffering with diseases and sicknesses more than women. The work place isn't even fair to you men either. You have to do all your work and some of the women's work and still only get paid the same. Idiots insult men child care workers and nurses. If a man loves children idiots call him a pedophile. Poor Michael Jackson was falsely accused of that. Men aren't allowed to cry or talk about how they feel. Which pisses me off because 80% of suicides are committed by men. Abused boyfriends and husbands are crapped on. But when a man finally has enough and fights back in self defense he's accused of being a woman beater. If he tells a woman she's beautiful he's called a creepy rapist. If he loses  to a woman in combat sports he's hated by people and called a pussy. If he wins he's still called a pussy because he only beat a woman. Men can't even look the way they want to. Men are accused of being evil all the time. You built the world and most people don't appreciate you for it.  If women ran the world I don't think they could make it any better. Nice men get walked on, unless you're Brian Shaw. Men aren't given enough respect in first world nation's like they should be. You're not war machines. You're not robots. You're not evil by default. You are human. Sorry your treated like crap. Sorry your suffering goes unnoticed. It's not much but you fellas have my respect.

 

There isn't really any need to feel sorry.

However, what inspired this thread, started in the context of those who talk about sexism in religious institutions, like it is only women who were played or judged with, and that men had no burdens or judgement. I think one of those was you, but I'm not holding it against you. I kind of like this.

 

In fact, there are less men in the churches of most Christian denominations than women, despite all the speak about "patriarchy!" in context of religion.

[◊ Weezer ◊]

5 hours ago, ChelseaGuy said:

 

In fact, there are less men in the churches of most Christian denominations than women, despite all the speak about "patriarchy!" in context of religion.

 

Especially the "liberal" denominations.  But it seems most people on this forum came from the fundamentalists churches led by men, and see that as the norm in Christianity.  HA!  We don't see many ex-methodists here.

[TruthSeeker0]

On 5/10/2020 at 1:38 AM, ChelseaGuy said:

For example, going by one of the previous-made threads on here, I see whenever people criticize sexism in the Bible or churches (and all other areas too) there is an unfair biased focus on the women. The thinking is that it's only women that were oppressed or had things bad and that men had everything very good. That is not the truth.

 

There are things that suck/sucked about being a man too:

• Men and boys are supposed to feel guilty for being attracted and looking with "lustful eyes" at women in religion and ironically, secular society too.
• Males live shorter lives compared to females and are also more likely to be born and affected with disabilities and conditions like Down Syndrome, autism, cerebral palsy...
• More men are depressed or lonely than women, also dudes have a harder time getting sex or partners than women, and are also more likely to be seen as "creepy".
• There are more points than I can list succinctly. Thing is about all of them, society doesn't really care or is actually hostile.

Sorry to report, but women will speak for their experiences as women. And when it's trauma and abuse it's the women who will mention it more because men are socialized to "take it like a man", "take it on the chin" and "suck it up", "don't be a wuss" etc. 

 

Also you're making unsupported claims without evidence, such as men have a harder time finding or getting sex or a partner. Where's the stats, where's your info coming from? How do you know more men are depressed? (Could very well be so, due to that suck it up attitude I mentioned and them not getting help for themselves). 

 

Also saying that society doesn't care and is hostile in also an unsupported claim. We are making some strides in how men are raised and socialized and this is helping. 

 

 

[TruthSeeker0]

5 hours ago, ChelseaGuy said:

 

There isn't really any need to feel sorry.

However, what inspired this thread, started in the context of those who talk about sexism in religious institutions, like it is only women who were played or judged with, and that men had no burdens or judgement. I think one of those was you, but I'm not holding it against you. I kind of like this.

 

In fact, there are less men in the churches of most Christian denominations than women, despite all the speak about "patriarchy!" in context of religion.

The existence of patriarchy isn't determined by the number of men in churches. That's a straight up outlandish claim - are you unaware of the number of fundamentalist patriarchal cults in which ONE man has a firm hold on the reigns? You should do more research regarding what patriarchy is in practice. Women discussing patriarchy doesn't somehow invalidate the fact that patriarchy can be toxic for men as well. 

[Myrkhoos]

2 hours ago, TruthSeeker0 said:

 

Also you're making unsupported claims without evidence, such as men have a harder time finding or getting sex or a partner. Where's the stats, where's your info coming from?

 

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/insight/201009/how-college-students-respond-being-propositioned-sex    only one tiny study in a specific environment. But still smth.:)

 

[TruthSeeker0]

13 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/insight/201009/how-college-students-respond-being-propositioned-sex    only one tiny study in a specific environment. But still smth.:)

 

Sex obviously means different things to men and women, that's what you can get out of that. So, to go around saying "boohoohoo, the world sucks for men and is sexist against men because men can't get sex so easily" is ridiculous. 

[Guest freedwoman]

21 hours ago, ChelseaGuy said:

 

There isn't really any need to feel sorry.

However, what inspired this thread, started in the context of those who talk about sexism in religious institutions, like it is only women who were played or judged with, and that men had no burdens or judgement. I think one of those was you, but I'm not holding it against you. I kind of like this.

 

In fact, there are less men in the churches of most Christian denominations than women, despite all the speak about "patriarchy!" in context of religion.

I am no crazy evil femmie. Most women disgust me. You're judging me only based on this forum. You don't know how out spoken I am about men's rights on other sites and in person. Yes in person too. I had a man bus driver tell me to be nice to other women when I was discussing men's rights with him. He didn't want me to offend those broads.  But you know what I'm done defending men. I'll tell you what I've told sexist women, fuck you! 

 

Also I will add you average men don't hit that hard. So much for your "superior strength." Go burn a pair of your boxers now. 

[TruthSeeker0]

11 minutes ago, freedwoman said:

I am no crazy evil femmie. Most women disgust me. You're judging me only based on this forum. You don't know how out spoken I am about men's rights on other sites and in person. Yes in person too. I had a man bus driver tell me to be nice to other women when I was discussing men's rights with him. He didn't want me to offend those broads.  But you know what I'm done defending men. I'll tell you what I've told sexist women, fuck you! 

 

Also I will add you average men don't hit that hard. So much for your "superior strength." Go burn a pair of your boxers now. 

I think it helps and is more effective if you point out the generalizations in arguments and the claims without any evidence, and request the evidence, instead of taking it as a personal attack - people may adopt the personal attack strategy in a debate to get you off your bearings so to speak. Remain cool and logical and point out the holes in the claims made, and the person you are debating/discussing with will have to follow up on those. 

I'm just saying this because you've said you wish to debate more. 

[Wertbag]

52 minutes ago, freedwoman said:

Also I will add you average men don't hit that hard. So much for your "superior strength."

You've been hit by a lot of "average" men to know how hard that is? If you've suffered abuse in the past I'm sorry to hear that, no one should have to go through that but unfortunately many women will. 

When people talk about the average man having superior strength it is in comparison to the average woman. You may say the average man doesn't hit very hard, but the average woman will hit even less so. 

In general, physically men have more muscle, broader frames, and more aggression. Every Olympic record attests to this. This has allowed men to physically dominate through the ages, however now that our society has moved to higher value in intellectual pursuits, such muscular strength is no longer the deciding factor in gaining wealth and power. 

[Guest freedwoman]

Wertbag LOL I'm a trained former fighter. I can take down your average man. Plus I was evenly matched with a man fighter. I'm not a victim. I will give no one that power over me. 

 

TruthSeeker0 Well I guess my debating style will be more aggressive still. I won't attack first. But if I'm attacked I will defend myself. I guess I'm just an aggressive debater. 

 

No pussy footing around.

[Guest freedwoman]

PFC Jennifer Jones.

 

Proves women fighters can beat men fighters. I'll bet she can hit harder than any man here. 

 

"Female Soldier proves dominant in hand-to-hand combat" https://www.army.mil/article-amp/56468/female_soldier_proves_dominant_in_hand_to_hand_combat

[TruthSeeker0]

31 minutes ago, freedwoman said:

Wertbag LOL I'm a trained former fighter. I can take down your average man. Plus I was evenly matched with a man fighter. I'm not a victim. I will give no one that power over me. 

 

TruthSeeker0 Well I guess my debating style will be more aggressive still. I won't attack first. But if I'm attacked I will defend myself. I guess I'm just an aggressive debater. 

 

No pussy footing around.

Well if you're debating, it's usually not about attacking your opponent or your opponent attacking you. Not in an intellectual debate. It's the ideas and philosophy you're supposed to discuss. 

[Wertbag]

6 hours ago, Guest freedwoman said:

Wertbag LOL I'm a trained former fighter. I can take down your average man. Plus I was evenly matched with a man fighter. I'm not a victim. I will give no one that power over me. 

Good for you, props for the hard work to get yourself safe.  Sadly your skill set is rare, both in males and females.  When it comes to untrained vs untrained then males will have physical advantages in most cases.  Women like Jennifer Jones are amazingly skilled but also the tiny minority of the worlds population.  When we are talking about the average person Ms Jones would not come into the discussion, she's an extreme example. 

[Myrkhoos]

11 hours ago, TruthSeeker0 said:

Sex obviously means different things to men and women, that's what you can get out of that. So, to go around saying "boohoohoo, the world sucks for men and is sexist against men because men can't get sex so easily" is ridiculous. 

I understood your argument as saying there is no evidence that men get sexual partners harder than women. That study tends to say that yes,  heterosexual men get sexual partners harder than heteresoxual women. 

     I did not say this was "sexist" as in unwarranted discrimination. Not all things can be simplified like that anyway. 

 

[TruthSeeker0]

5 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

I understood your argument as saying there is no evidence that men get sexual partners harder than women. That study tends to say that yes,  heterosexual men get sexual partners harder than heteresoxual women. 

     I did not say this was "sexist" as in unwarranted discrimination. Not all things can be simplified like that anyway. 

 

Yes they find it harder because women have different reasons for sex as men do. Of course that's a generalization of some sort but supports a broader pattern - men will choose immediate gratification whereas women view sex as commitment of some sort. And it makes complete sense in an evolutionary perspective - it's the woman who may get pregnant and have another mouth to feed and thus requires more resources. 

 

Now if people understood this they wouldn't need to go crying that men have a harder time getting sex and that it's ignored and somehow sexism towards men is at play. 

[Myrkhoos]

You know this topic gets me thinking. Where do human values come from ? And can a materialistic worldview support ideas like equality of rights?.I guess the argument would be utilitarian. What is the form of society that brings the most pleasure and least pain ? There is a case here for rights based ideas. I agree not to kill you if you agree not to kill me,  a tit for tat kind of thing. A social contract. The same with unwarranted discrimination in the workplace. I would like the best doctors and engineers because I like efficient surgery and sturdy bridges.  What leads to the happiest marriages, childhoods,,etc? I think this is more honest than some abstract unprovable thing like "intrinsic or sanctity of life". We already live like that most of the time but we are not conscious of it. It is even in  the gospel,  judge a tree by its fruit.  It is not always easy or clear but it seems to have a more solid and easily understood foundation. Realistically working towards personal and collective happiness.

[TruthSeeker0]

What do you mean by materialist? How would you define it?