Should All Democratic Societies Have a Minister for Men's Behaviour...

[Bigga]

Modern perceptions of a man's role have changed from the previous generations.
A man is expected to be more family orientated and sensitive to the needs of his immediate family.
My dad was nothing like this. I am halfway there, but this change caught me betwixt and between.
You don't need a minister for men being dicks. You need a better education system and less objectification of women.
Rules that are already in place must be tightened.

Interesting.

Your point examines nature vs nurture. There are times were one cannot stifle nature lest it forces itself out in some less useful way. The nature of objectifying women helps the Human race grow, does it not? Is it not a form of attraction that leads one to try and be in a sexual position with that other sex that, ultimately, produces another Human?

Of course I'm not talking about taking someone's sex without consent before posters jump on the statement. I'm expressing the inner turmoil of objectification.

Generally speaking, men tend to want to spread their seed and women tend to focus on somebody in particular, but they also objectify.

If you're talking about nurturing the natural position of men in general to be less masculine in nature, does this not lead to repression? If this is so, this is where the 'red pill' found its seed to blossom and it's not without merit in its assertion of a power imbalance or emasculation. We can see it in tangibles and intangibles.

It's very complex situation and conversation to examine.

 

[mrbelfry]

Society doesn't diminish men or demand unattainable levels of success from them. Instead, it's beginning to expect higher behavioral and moral standards from us (and let's face it, we’ve got a lot of room for improvement).

As an average guy who works hard for his family and enjoys a beer, I always feel valued and believe that I am enough. Are you speaking about men in general here, or is this more about your personal experience?


The uncomfortable truth here is that violence is the response you'll get from violent men.

If others have mentioned that your arguments come across as aggressive or intimidating, it's worth taking a moment to reflect on that. Many of us have experienced heated arguments with family, friends, or coworkers, where, in the heat of the moment, our behaviour seemed normal, even justified. However, upon reflection, we realise how it could have been perceived differently by others.

If you're expressing yourself in a violent manner, it's a serious issue that needs to be addressed.

Openness is both healthy and beneficial. Many men, particularly older ones, struggle with the fear of vulnerability, something the younger generation is generally better at handling. It's important to understand that this fear is normal, and there is always support available, whether through a friend, family member, or even a stranger on an online forum.

I'm speaking about men in general. I don't drink beer :)

I'll disagree with you about societies expectations and the burden it places on men. Andrew Tate and the like are evidence of that. I also know young men who think they have failed when their first car isn't a BMW and who can't afford to buy their first house in Urmston. YouTube is full of gurus telling you successful people get up 4am and do madness throughout the day.

I am generally protected from all that by being lazy and unmotivated but when people I know are taking their kids to Disney World it does make me feel like I've let my kids down.

You final paragraphs make some of my point. I'm not shouting or aggressive I'm just loud and expressive. This is somehow unacceptable behaviour and I need to get therapy. Or maybe that's one expression of my masculinity and the tiny bits of testosterone floating around my body and I should be allowed to express it. In those moments I'm not shouting, I don't swear, I don't get in anyone's face and I'm not threatening.

I'm all for men taking responsibility and increasing behavioural standards and morality. But can you please explain more about where you think men have failed and what massive improvements you think need to be made? Morality is not universal unfortunately and I think is pretty messed up.

I watched a recent YouTube podcast thing where two guests were attacking the host about an interaction between him and a girl that had been on a previous episode. The host had become frustrated that the girls phone rang during the show and the two male guests said that was out of order and he didn't respect women due to the way he spoke to her. However their job was also running a podcast that visited porn sets and talking to the people there. They had no problem with an 18 year old girl being filmed doing horrible things with men and it being filmed and put on the internet for ever. Not did they see a problem with themselves having multiple sexual partners. But they did draw the line at someone being treated a little mean (interestingly they said if demeaning language was used during the filming of a scene that was ok as the girl was being paid).

 

[burning blue soul]

Interesting.

Your point examines nature vs nurture. There are times were one cannot stifle nature lest it forces itself out in some less useful way. The nature of objectifying women helps the Human race grow, does it not? Is it not a form of attraction that leads one to try and be in a sexual position with that other sex that, ultimately, produces another Human?

Of course I'm not talking about taking someone's sex without consent before posters jump on the statement. I'm expressing the inner turmoil of objectification.

Generally speaking, men tend to want to spread their seed and women tend to focus on somebody in particular, but they also objectify.

If you're talking about nurturing the natural position of men in general to be less masculine in nature, does this not lead to repression? If this is so, this is where the 'red pill' found its seed to blossom and it's not without merit in its assertion of a power imbalance or emasculation. We can see it in tangibles and intangibles.

It's very complex situation and conversation to examine.

One man's relationship evolution is another man's relationship repression. Changes to social dynamics have resulted in men having to change their ideas of what being a partner is.
Men didn't change on their own, they had to adapt. If they didn't their chances of getting the best mate would be in jeopardy.
The old male traits of a generation ago won't cut it anymore in modern relationships. Obviously, there are still exceptions to the rule in some cultural environments.
Objectification comes in different degrees. Instant attraction is objectifying a person, but after that in the beginnings of a healthy relationship then subjectification comes into play.
Men are now taking a more holistic approach to relationships. As I say above, they do it because they must (mostly).
The glorification of objectification in women as, basically, a collection of reproductive spare parts and an adult fun ride for a male, is the kickback to the modern suppression of evolved male selfish urges.
E.g. "you make me less of a man, I'll make you less of a woman"

Seems there is a gender arms race being fired by external influences (usually for financial gain), social dynamics, and male ego.
BTW, a reduction in the over-masculinity of the male race does not mean imasculation. It means there is (hopefully) more parity in their shared relationship leading to shared respect and happier family environment. Which is a good thing, is in not?
Relationships, from a male perspective, have historically been about female subjugation. If a healthy society is what we want then this ideology must be consigned to the skip.
The best way to change the social dynamic is to vastly improve education and make 70% of coppers women.

 

[mrbelfry]

Interesting.

Your point examines nature vs nurture. There are times were one cannot stifle nature lest it forces itself out in some less useful way. The nature of objectifying women helps the Human race grow, does it not? Is it not a form of attraction that leads one to try and be in a sexual position with that other sex that, ultimately, produces another Human?

Of course I'm not talking about taking someone's sex without consent before posters jump on the statement. I'm expressing the inner turmoil of objectification.

Generally speaking, men tend to want to spread their seed and women tend to focus on somebody in particular, but they also objectify.

If you're talking about nurturing the natural position of men in general to be less masculine in nature, does this not lead to repression? If this is so, this is where the 'red pill' found its seed to blossom and it's not without merit in its assertion of a power imbalance or emasculation. We can see it in tangibles and intangibles.

It's very complex situation and conversation to examine.

I can be sexually attracted to a woman without objectifying her (by which I mean seeing her purely as an object to have sex with) but I can also control my sexual desire.

Men may want to spread their seed but it's not good for us to do this in my opinion. I only have sex with my wife because
A) she's the only woman willing to have sex with me
B) there is something beautiful in us both restricting a desire to be expressed with one person that I only do that with. It elevates both the act and the environment it's expressed within.

 

[BrianW]

Men are simply wired differently.

Women tend to be good with words. This can include (it certainly does not exclude) manipulative skills. I suspect it's an evolutionary thing. For centuries, women needed to be diplomats to avoid getting smacked.

Men tend to be less good with words. This can easily lead to frustration in arguments. Less intelligent and naturally violent men often think that the solution is to hit out. If you put someone on the floor, you've won the argument, haven't you? For centuries men were conditioned to be warriors. Their physical strength made them masters as well as warriors. Now physical strength is much less important. Even HGVs have power steering, so a woman, or in theory a child, can drive them. Even in the 50s, most women could not have coped.

How you make this better I don't know.

 

[Bigga]

One man's relationship evolution is another man's relationship repression. Changes to social dynamics have resulted in men having to change their ideas of what being a partner is.
Men didn't change on their own, they had to adapt. If they didn't their chances of getting the best mate would be in jeopardy.
The old male traits of a generation ago won't cut it anymore in modern relationships. Obviously, there are still exceptions to the rule in some cultural environments.
Objectification comes in different degrees. Instant attraction is objectifying a person, but after that in the beginnings of a healthy relationship then subjectification comes into play.
Men are now taking a more holistic approach to relationships. As I say above, they do it because they must (mostly).
The glorification of objectification in women as, basically, a collection of reproductive spare parts and an adult fun ride for a male, is the kickback to the modern suppression of evolved male selfish urges.
E.g. "you make me less of a man, I'll make you less of a woman"

Seems there is a gender arms race being fired by external influences (usually for financial gain), social dynamics, and male ego.
BTW, a reduction in the over-masculinity of the male race does not mean imasculation. It means there is (hopefully) more parity in their shared relationship leading to shared respect and happier family environment. Which is a good thing, is in not?
Relationships, from a male perspective, have historically been about female subjugation. If a healthy society is what we want then this ideology must be consigned to the skip.
The best way to change the social dynamic is to vastly improve education and make 70% of coppers women.

This is an interesting aspect of the discussion for me. Lots of blame on men.

Your PoV has been reflected in the dating algorithm and those same dating app worth has dropped off dramatically over the last 24-48 months. Since Covid, the hookup culture has [de?]evolved from men and women picking each other to women doing the picking. Those picks tend to be high end choices that (as you say) have been shaped by (for example) 5ft women wanting 6ft 6' men who earn over a mil a year and those men should have enough time for them and to listen and put them first!

This is a trend started by MSM for the 'empowerment of women' (nothing wrong with that bit), but the Pandora's Box has just revealed more unrealistic things that are unachievable for the very average woman. There's a LOT of women choosing to leave relationships for the 'greener grass' of less than 20% of men... where lots of women are already. Divorce is initiated by women, roughly, 80% of the time with this reflection of the times.

Modern women have asked not to be approached and that has been granted. Now there's more complaints about why that has stopped. Women have asked for better pay in jobs and a career path and the birth rate has dropped.

As a response, it seems modern average men are also choosing not to pick women without them having a standard they want now or being forced to be depressed in a cycle that prevents them from their natural way of being with dating. Young men, especially, are the victims of the new dating culture.

Is this getting to an impasse?

Who knows, but we shall see clearer over the next 5 years, I think.

 

[Bigga]

I can be sexually attracted to a woman without objectifying her (by which I mean seeing her purely as an object to have sex with) but I can also control my sexual desire.

Men may want to spread their seed but it's not good for us to do this in my opinion. I only have sex with my wife because
A) she's the only woman willing to have sex with me
B) there is something beautiful in us both restricting a desire to be expressed with one person that I only do that with. It elevates both the act and the environment it's expressed within.

Being married/ having a selected partner for life is, of course, the ultimate goal.

But, as you grew to your current position, did you not objectify women in your youth? Singers? Film stars? The teacher? Neighbour?

It's, almost, impossible for a man not to do so before the experience of enough dates allows them to see past that.

 

[burning blue soul]

This is an interesting aspect of the discussion for me. Lots of blame on men.

Your PoV has been reflected in the dating algorithm and those same dating app worth has dropped off dramatically over the last 24-48 months. Since Covid, the hookup culture has [de?]evolved from men and women picking each other to women doing the picking. Those picks tend to be high end choices that (as you say) have been shaped by (for example) 5ft women wanting 6ft 6' men who earn over a mil a year and those men should have enough time for them and to listen and put them first!

This is a trend started by MSM for the 'empowerment of women' (nothing wrong with that bit), but the Pandora's Box has just revealed more unrealistic things that are unachievable for the very average woman. There's a LOT of women choosing to leave relationships for the 'greener grass' of less than 20% of men... where lots of women are already. Divorce is initiated by women, roughly, 80% of the time with this reflection of the times.

Modern women have asked not to be approached and that has been granted. Now there's more complaints about why that has stopped. Women have asked for better pay in jobs and a career path and the birth rate has dropped.

As a response, it seems modern average men are also choosing not to pick women without them having a standard they want now or being forced to be depressed in a cycle that prevents them from their natural way of being with dating. Young men, especially, are the victims of the new dating culture.

Is this getting to an impasse?

Who knows, but we shall see clearer over the next 5 years, I think.

Not blame on men. Cultural behaviour that was once accepted as norm, but is now rejected is not a blame situation. Its just societal change.

Drop offs in suitable matches on dating apps is down to the very thing I am talking about. Women expect more from their partner. Women change their partner more often (if that is as you say) because the treatment they receive and imbalance in division of labour around the family environment has pushed them to it.
Yes, there is a risk of men and women overreaching on their requirements for a partner, but this is all part of the process.

It looks like lifestyle expectation is now the flarepoint of modern relationships. Women can be independent and have decisions in the way they live their live's, and type of partner they believe they need to be happy and contented.

Men have to adapt to this in relationships and in society as a whole.

 

[mrbelfry]

Being married/ having a selected partner for life is, of course, the ultimate goal.

But, as you grew to your current position, did you not objectify women in your youth? Singers? Film stars? The teacher? Neighbour?

It's, almost, impossible for a man not to do so before the experience of enough dates allows them to see past that.

I guess we would need to agree on a definition of objectification otherwise we can talk at cross purposes.

We all use a short hand way of thinking as that's the easiest way to navigate life. One of the short hands we use is "attractiveness" ie we tend to sort people into groups we find attractive and our behaviour subtly changes. We don't just sort based on fitness but also race, height, age, nationality etc. is this objectifying or is objectification based purely on sexual attraction?

Everyone who's ever dated anyone has done so based on an attraction. A big part of that is physical attraction and a big part of my marriage is still based on physical attraction BUT it's not just appearance that feeds into that attraction. And when I'm interacting with my wife it's not purely in order to get her to sleep with me and when I do get lucky my aim is not solely my sexual satisfaction but hers. That to me is the difference between objectification - my motivation is towards her benefit and not my own.

Anyhoo lots of words which I'm not sure even addressed your comment. I think I'm agreeing with you ultimately.

There is more to be said about where the objection to objectifying women sits in the only fans generation. The video posted earlier also made an interesting point about how few men are having sex whilst living in a hypersexualised world. If you feel like everyone is having sex but
you (even though the figures seem to be consistent - the feeling isnt) then it's not hard to see why we have the rise of incels etc.

 

[ROCKET80]

I'm speaking about men in general. I don't drink beer :)

I'll disagree with you about societies expectations and the burden it places on men. Andrew Tate and the like are evidence of that. I also know young men who think they have failed when their first car isn't a BMW and who can't afford to buy their first house in Urmston. YouTube is full of gurus telling you successful people get up 4am and do madness throughout the day.

I am generally protected from all that by being lazy and unmotivated but when people I know are taking their kids to Disney World it does make me feel like I've let my kids down.

You final paragraphs make some of my point. I'm not shouting or aggressive I'm just loud and expressive. This is somehow unacceptable behaviour and I need to get therapy. Or maybe that's one expression of my masculinity and the tiny bits of testosterone floating around my body and I should be allowed to express it. In those moments I'm not shouting, I don't swear, I don't get in anyone's face and I'm not threatening.

I'm all for men taking responsibility and increasing behavioural standards and morality. But can you please explain more about where you think men have failed and what massive improvements you think need to be made? Morality is not universal unfortunately and I think is pretty messed up.

I watched a recent YouTube podcast thing where two guests were attacking the host about an interaction between him and a girl that had been on a previous episode. The host had become frustrated that the girls phone rang during the show and the two male guests said that was out of order and he didn't respect women due to the way he spoke to her. However their job was also running a podcast that visited porn sets and talking to the people there. They had no problem with an 18 year old girl being filmed doing horrible things with men and it being filmed and put on the internet for ever. Not did they see a problem with themselves having multiple sexual partners. But they did draw the line at someone being treated a little mean (interestingly they said if demeaning language was used during the filming of a scene that was ok as the girl was being paid).

Andrew Tate doesn't represent society as a whole; he is an abhorrent figure riding the wave of toxic masculinity, using his platform to promote an aggressive, materialistic, and domineering version of what it means to be a man to a minority of vulnerable young men. It's important to note that this is not just a modern phenomenon, degenerates like Tate use social media to amplify it.

When you mention feeling like you've let your kids down because others are taking their families to places like Disney World, these feelings are a reflection of external pressures, not personal failure. Success and being a good parent aren't defined by expensive trips or luxury items.

Expressing masculinity in ways that are loud or assertive isn't inherently negative, but it's essential to balance that with self-awareness and respect for others, especially so if the feedback you receive is that you come across as aggressive. It's about understanding that masculinity can be expressed in diverse ways, and that empathy, emotional intelligence, and responsibility are equally valid and important aspects of being a man.

In terms of where men have failed, we must address the outdated stereotypes that have historically defined masculinity and contributed to the objectification and marginalisation of women. For centuries, cultural and religious influences shaped the worldview where men’s worth was tied to rigid roles whilst women were seen as objects, whether as property, symbols of status, or mere caretakers within the home. On a good day they were seen as a prize to be won.

Men frequently denied women basic rights and autonomy, treated them as possessions rather than individuals with their own voices and choices. Reinforced by patriarchal structures that placed men in positions of power and control, not only in the household but also in wider society. Women were relegated to passive roles, their identities and worth defined by their relationships to men, whether as daughters, wives, or mothers.

The consequences have been profound. Women have been systematically denied opportunities for education, leadership, and independence, leading to widespread inequality that persists today. Children, too, have suffered under these dynamics, growing up in environments where relationships were based on authority and control rather than mutual respect and collaboration.

These failures are already being addressed, I can see a vast difference between the 'lad culture' I grew up in during the 90s and the present day. There is still work to be done, progress has been made in expanding our understanding of masculinity and promoting equality, but the influence of religion in many societies continues to reinforce traditional gender roles. Even in more secular communities, the structures and ideals that have long objectified women and denied them opportunities are still present.