Sexism against guys

Post Reply New Topic

hmn. . . that's a fair enough sort of response.

The less important thing is, I don't have enough personal experience (and I don't think it is possible to have enough personal experience) to make a definitive statement about who "comes out ahead," but I'm (evidently) inclined to disagree with you.


The more important thing is, I don't think that's even the right kind of question to be asking.

Take your Valentines/engagement example. Men are expected to spend absurd amounts of their money (the opportunity cost of which is time/choices) to express their affection. . . Women are expected to be happy about receiving gifts which consist of status symbols whose entire value--symbolic, emotional, exchange, and utility wise--is a social construct intentionally designed to financially enrich De Beers. . . and unhappy if they don't receive such gifts.

The tradition of giving expensive jewelery to women used to have a much more meaningful edge. Women weren't allowed to work, and much of the jewelery in question had a higher exchange value relative to the necessities of life. Getting your fiance a huge ring was a gesture of security--that if something happened to you she wouldn't starve or be forced into prostitution. Now it mostly supports racially unequal economic infrastructures in Africa, while conveniently forming a part of soon-to-be crippling consumerism (for both genders) and economic oppression (for men) here in the west.

Is anyone--besides obviously our good capitalist leaders--actually benefiting from this situation?



It's true that the currency of victimhood can purchase social benefits. I don't think that fact particularly makes this world better for women or men.

Men are unlikely to find mates if they do not appear competent, respected, and successful. Women are unlikely to find mates if they do not appear sexually attractive, complacent, and extremely nonthreatening.

Since competence and success are things I'd likely want to pursue anyway, I feel that I am oppressed by living in a culture where men often stop considering me as a romantic possibility when I reveal myself as competent and un-victim-like. . . More oppressed, even, then men are, living in a culture where they are unlikely to find a mate unless they can come across as economically competent.

This, though, is not the part that matters; the part that matters is, it oppresses us all. A culture that places massive pressure on women to be sexually attractive and then sexualizes vulnerability, incompetence, and victimhood--besides devaluing the social currency victimhood should legitimately hold, and trivializing the victimhood of men when it occurs--makes it nigh on impossible for members of either gender to find non-game-playing people they'd really want to spend their lives with. . . because we are so busy acting and resenting our roles, rather than being the human beings we would want to be.

QFT.

I find that I generally like both women and men better if I force myself to think of them as 'people' rather than 'men and women.' The question, 'Is John a good man,' for example, becomes 'Is John a good person,' and shifts me away from judging him based on my culturally indoctrinated presumptions of what a 'man' should be. On the one hand, it removes some of the extra reasons for criticism that society heaps on everyone's shoulders; on the other hand, it takes away some of the excuses people have for bad behavior.

Interesting argument to engage in.

Though the above is in general an approximation of the truth, I think that we need to observe the disparity of attracting short term and life long mates.

Men and women tend to gather their evidence about what the other gender wants in a mate based on the dating scene. I know from personal experience that what I want from a women depends greatly on the type of relationship I plan on having with her (actually the type of relationship I have with her depends on who she is and her personal qualities, but anyway). For example:

- If I just want to look at some pin-up model she better have a nice body, don't care about her personality (for the most part).
- If I want to just be friends with a girl (happens a lot) she just needs to be a generally good person (in the broadest definition).
- If I am going to just have some short term fun as in dating and sleeping with her then the "sexually attractive, complacent, and extremely nonthreatening." Actually, the non-threatening would be more that girls are completely taken with the male rather.
- For a life partner (at least in relationships that stick) Guys typically choose someone who will challenge them while continuing to be fun. I personally prefer women who are successful and seek personal independence.

I think in the dating game that men like to play the hero and women sometimes fall into the trap of playing the damsel in distress (why not, its fun). This could stem from childhood stories filled with princesses that need to be saved by dashing knights in shinning armor.

Next angle

I believe that too many men and women think that relationships resemble in some way the media image of them. Both guys and girls need to learn that neither can read minds. Both parties, except in strong, established relationships, are winging it. I think that talking things out is a great way to deepen the relationship, or end it. I also believe that due to the media image that everyone has their own distorted image of who they and their parter are supposed to be in the relationship when the truth is that they should just be themselves. Men are expected to always want sex and women are expected to despise sex.

Next angle

Always asking for sex

Some guys just don't know how to ask. Kiss her like you mean it dang-it. Make her feel beautiful and like she is the only one that you would want to kiss in the world (and mean it ). If she doesn't want to go further then let her know that kissing her is enough, for now (and mean it ). I do think that some girls with the images discussed above interpret one time asking as a guy who only wants them for sex. Unfortunately there are guys out there who only want girlfriends for sex. There are an incredible number of ways that are advised to weed out the sex fiends, but so the heck what. If you want sex with him, go for it. If not he will either take a cold shower (interested in you) or find someone else to mate with (only interested in sex).

So what you folks are saying is that Sexism towards males here is mainly the result of the complications AS can induce into sexual politics??

I don't see anything on this thread that even remotely implies that. Where are you getting that impression?

Guys have higher testosterone levels than women, so naturally, we have higher sex drives (in general.) This means we want it more often, not "all the time." I personally crave other non-sexual things as well, like affection and companionship. If all I wanted was sexual pleasure, I'd be perfectly happy being single. True, sex is a higher priority for most men than it is for most women, and there are a lot of slu*ty guys out there who like to use women for sex. But even though you should watch out for such guys, it's BS to think that we're all like that... just as it's BS to think that all women only want wealth and power. I hope you'll be able to see past the stereotypes.

Actually I don't see anything differing from NT gender relations in western cultures. If I was forced to point a finger at one culprit I would blame a breakdown of communication. From my experience we are much more alike than we think (men and women) but have different ways of expressing them.

I also think that the problem comes from the systemic issue of people who pay too much attention to themselves rather than others. I am not talking narcissists because they are quite rare. I am talking about worrying about whether our quirks show to our friends and partners. Putting the breaks on them is often advised, but putting all your effort into completely hiding them just wares you and your partner out.

When I was DX'ed at 27, my wife and I went through a rocky period, but now we are closer and happier because I learned that my quirks are just what she loves about me, even my AS issues. That doesn't say much for the work she put in on herself, but that is another issue (so I don't get torched, she finally told her mom that she, and not her mother, was to be in charge of her life and her self worth).

Then why are you speaking on her behalf?

I definitely pick up on the fact that she has a big ego, but all in all her social skills seem much better than most people here.
I find that I clash Very violently with people of both sexes who have big ego's and/or narcissistic tendencies. Ironically I have these myself and so I percieve other peoples egoes as a challenge.

men and women are tools...people are great, though ^.^

People are tools.

tools to build the largest human pyramid ever! MUAHAHAHA!

That isn't really the purpose of this forum.

See the thing is I see male-bashing as subversive and when challenged is either fobbed off as a joke, as the male questioning it as being thin-skinned or misogynist, something the man "just doesn't appreciate" or the women's right because of what they have been through (in history?).

Much in the way of the sitcoms is the normal/loving/sensible wife and zany/incompetant/useless/stupid husband. In fact I read that in "Family Ties" the writers were instructed that the mum could not be made to do anything out of the character of the normal wife. Of course we also have Mere Male articles in many magazines sprouting the "silliness" of men where women can read, laugh, gloat, shake their heads and lower their opinion of men.

Then you have the stereotyping of what men are after. I don't even want to discuss this.

What I will tell you is that on a personal level. I was separated from my wife. She wanted me gone and I left her the house to live in whilst I moved out and took very much the bare basics. She wanted to look after the children and I let her keep them with her and the house.
When we divorced the split of assets was approx. $118K/$23K - because she was a woman with my children and I was the man.
After moving intestate separately so my children had better schooling she decided to stop access to my children. She could do this too as she the children and there were no orders in place. I had to spend $6K with court/lawyers and 9 months without access to the children because she was a woman and had my children. The aspect of playing "Keepy off the Father" was not questioned or needing validating. Nor the effect of doing this because she was a woman and had my children. The stress and pain was unbearable. I had a stress induced heart attack in May.

So sexism? Yeah it exists. Think that it is all one way? I don't. I see a lot of disrespect from individuals on both sides and must admit it has taken me the longest time to not be damning of all women. Don't think I could really trust a woman again but who knows.

Halle Bopp being sexist is not something you ought to be hi-fiving yourself for. Definitely something to work on though, now that you are aware of it.

Thank you to the OP who started this maybe serious discussion like this will help dispel a few myths and allow us to celebrate true differences without adopting silly stereotypical views of gender difference and thought.

First of all, I have been subjected to PLENTY of "reverse" sexism IRL. Furthermore, even as a child I recieved a great deal of disapproval from women for being socially clumsy. I do not believe for a moment that contemporary western women are powerless and furthermore, I notice that Fewer and Fewer women my age are complaining about "male oppression". There are however, a few hardline feminists who think that feminism is Anything thats in womens self-interest and seem to have a sense of entitlement stemming from being female. I'd really like to know WHY so many aspie women adopt this attitude and WHY they have *issues* with men. I dont recognize womens entitlement to victim status just because they are female; and most NT women I run into do not take this approach with men. I dont feel the least bit sorry for poor little hale_bopp; she's an attractive young women in a place where women certainly do wield a great deal of power.

Again I do not agree with much of what Haliphron says nor do I think that Aspie women are particularly guilty of such thinking BUT he is right on this one by and large.

I think that women "being oppressed by men" in many respects can be a useless role or tool to get faourable treatment or win arguments and ha little to do with reality.
Recently there was a bit of a backlash in Country Western Australia where the suicide rate in young men skyrocketed and the women were attributing a lot of this to the cultural understanding that men did not have the support structures in place that women had when things went wrong, men did not culturally talk when they had problems, men were taught to be the protectors, providers and it was the men and not the women who were dying early because of the pressures placed on them.

It was the women who identified this and the women who were seeing their husbands, brothers, sons dying too early. Thankfully the reports are all shelved somewhere (along with the stress related heart attacks between genders) and we can once again focus on the oppression of women.

1) How bad is it that I thought Alex was a guy? After reading this thread I had to check her profile to find out I was wrong this whole time.

2) Sexism goes both ways, this is an absolute given. Women are typically given more leeway because of the prevalance of abusive situations, and while not trusting half the population based on the dickishness of one guy is a bit extreme, having been raped by a guy, I can tell you that it's extremely hard for me to let a man in and to trust one.

3) Sexism, or I should say Genderism against the feminine is still prevalent in today's society, or else drag queens and transsexuals and effeminite men everywhere wouldn't be the target of ridicule.