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

[mrbelfry]

I saw this and wanted know what people thought of it. It's,essentially, nothing to do with Tate.

It's not a channel I frequent, Talk TV, but the conversation seemed apt for this thread. I had to listen to it a few times to 'hear' clearly what's being said in the baseline.

It's about 10 mins.



Thoughts...?

I think this conversation demonstrates how hard it might be to write laws here. We quickly go from incels to high school to Pakistan. They are all different things in my opinion. Plus I think we maybe discussed this earlier and youve definitely alluded to it in previous posts - you can't really fix men in isolation.

 

[KS55]

I have been sexually assaulted three times by women. Total strangers. I didn’t complain. Time for a minister, though.

 

[Bigga]

I think this conversation demonstrates how hard it might be to write laws here. We quickly go from incels to high school to Pakistan. They are all different things in my opinion. Plus I think we maybe discussed this earlier and youve definitely alluded to it in previous posts - you can't really fix men in isolation.

Yes, I alluded to it as I saw the 'problems' forthcoming like a slow motion car crash. Some things were totally avoidable and now we're at a point of conflation where we find it difficult to separate the issues.

 

[mrbelfry]

Yes, I alluded to it as I saw the 'problems' forthcoming like a slow motion car crash. Some things were totally avoidable and now we're at a point of conflation where we find it difficult to separate the issues.

What do you think is clearly being said in the video?

 

[Bigga]

What do you think is clearly being said in the video?

In short; feminism has no faults.

It seems one cannot have a critique of modern/ new leftism thinking without being accused of an 'ism', so can and should criticism lead to being accused of 'terrorism'? I understand the clip is about the "extreme" end of criticism of women, but who's going to decide the grading? After all, threats and wishes to kill already have laws, don't they?

And where's Khan's proof that all men who are "InCels" lead to being misogynistic? I'd bet there are much much more just by themselves, in their own space, doing comfortable things like playing vid games or spending time online with friends or being with family.

I didn't understand her definition of "radicalisation" being apt for criticism of women. It didn't make any sense. After all "being open to committing a violent act" is going to depend on the information gotten from a source. This includes MSM, by the way! We see it all the time with the information delivered from one skewed perspective.

There is, understandable, critique of Mr Tate. He hasn't covered himself in glory with his past behaviour. It doesn't mean he can't isolate an issue about the current dynamics today and be right. It's just lost in the rest of the noise... But it's his own noise that he created. His positives, though, is about getting young men to find their self worth. I don't think that should be issue.

Ms Khan also seems not to understand that low paid jobs are low esteem are very linked.

I, also, note that Ms Khan is very happy to promote that men are misogynistic, but not speak on when women are missandrous. We want equality, right? She speaks on [what we used to call] boys being cheeky about the plate collecting (I think she speaks of personal experience here) basically being 'sexist' at young ages. But, kids sort out their social groups themselves. Girls stand on girls and boys stand on boys. It's how our peers and social hierarchy is built.

All her own personal circumstances had been "lucky", so she nothing to really offer in how she dealt with 'misogyny' growing up. For me it got bizarre when she inserted her Muslim first gen culture into Western 'values' and didn't blink once about the culture clash at this stage of societal growth of cultures living with each other.

A better presenter would have exposed her points more, but it seems the presenter held back.

An opinion, of course.

 

[ROCKET80]

And "...the outdated stereotypes that have historically defined masculinity..." means what, exactly? Are men not 'hunter-gatherers' by nature? Are you suggesting to bend the natural impulse of men to provide and protect?

No, men are not 'hunter-gatherers' by nature and the impulse to provide and protect is not an inherent trait, people of all genders can have the desire to provide and protect, and are increasingly seen as shared responsibilities in modern society. You are overlooking the complexity and diversity of individuals, their experiences, and abilities.

'Most' men have this natural raw guttural instinct to of himself for his 'territory' however you might perceive that word. But, in context, it is for love and family, which extends beyond that in times of crisis.

Again this behaviour is not universally or exclusively "natural" to men.

And I, highly, dispute your assertion that women were seen as "passive" or "being denied education". I think you're, purposely, conflating a world of women rather than secluded sections of the world. The broadbase Western culture is highly different than other cultures of the globe. Your jibe is proposing Western culture is 'better'.

There is centuries worth of evidence to show that women were seen as passive, and were denied access to education across all cultures and societies. I don't know which part you read as a jibe or where I proposed or implied anywhere that Western Culture is 'better'.

In whose eyes...? Do you speak for the women that much prefer men to lead and be the revered matriarch that binds the family? Are you placing your value on them...?

I don't know what bit you're referring to here. If I woman wants that and is happy with it, then all power to her.

As for the "vast difference" you see today? Sure, the 'laddish' culture is pretty much gone. But, with that has gone the ability to approach females and leading young men to be less assured in being 'masculine' enough to cold approach a female they like, and those men, more often than not, to not explore outside of their comfort/ safety zones.

I disagree with this, on a night/day out you still see men approach women, it was a little more uncouth back the 90s. Also being able to cold approach a woman has absolutely nothing to do masculinity.

I asked you this very simple question that you chose to ignore. I asked you because I could see the post you made coming.

Bigga said:
Let me ask you a question; should domestic violence be treated exactly the same between relationships regardless of whom is the aggressor or as a tier system...??

The answer to the question is that each incident of domestic violence is assessed based on its individual circumstances, regardless of the gender of the perpetrator and victim.

Much like in what happened in the thread about the skirmish at the airport where a female officer got her nose broken, the question is do you (as someone that wants to do away with the differences between men and women) support women being in the front line for all aspects of physical roles that men do?

I've never stated anywhere that I want to do away with differences between men and women.
If women want to be on the front line of physical roles that men do, why wouldn't I support that?

You cannot have it both ways when claiming women are not equal under the law.

So, in my opinion, your assertion that there is "...widespread inequality that persists today" is a misstatement. In which way are Western women not equal?? Name a right they are denied in this day and age. And nobody can record the personal lives of any couple on a day-to-day basis and administer findings as a whole to society.

I'm not claiming anything both ways.

Rights are about what individuals are entitled to, inequality is about the disparities that exist within those rights between different groups be it based on gender, race, religion, or sexuality.

 

[ROCKET80]

Andrew Tate is a product of or a reaction to society. I have no respect for him btw. His vision of what a man is applies toxic pressure on men and is dangerous to women. I'm probably explaining myself poorly but he's not the only person extolling an alpha male paradigm which tells men they are failures if they aren't rich and strong.

Re Disney world. Yes I thought it was clear I was talking about external pressures. External pressures shape internal feelings. No man is an island.

Your comments on me being loud and assertive proves my point when you add the caveat. It's an expression of masculinity that is now being "feminised". Specifically talking about these moments my actions are not aggressive yet are perceived as such and I'm told to calm it down. That this "masculine" express is perceived negatively is my point and is evidence of another "toxic masculine" trait that must be blunted. My wife also hates being told to calm down when she perceives herself to be calm. Same situation where her expression is deemed appropriate but mine isn't.

Re the point about men's failings and gender roles etc. I pretty much agree with the video posted earlier.

Re women treated as property etc I wonder how much that actually worked out in relationships. I think of my grandparents who pretty much lived out their lives in those gender roles. I'm pretty sure my grandad never once considered my grandma her property. His responsibility for sure but in the same way my grandma considered him her responsibility as well. When my sister got married a few years ago she objected to my dad "giving her away" because she was no mans property. I'm pretty sure my dad has never ever once considered that he owned my sister but he was denied the opportunity to express a handing over of responsibility and care. Can my sister take care of herself? Absolutely but isn't family about having people around to take care of you?

Call me old fashioned but I do believe there is a difference between the genders which should be celebrated. It shouldn't be used to deny rights or opportunities or subjugate. My wife earns considerably more than me and in terms of labour around the house we are pretty equal so we're a modern family in that respect. However when the toilet is blocked, the bin needs emptying or we think there's an intruder in the house those things are definitely for me to sort out. Conversely only she could become pregnant.

Your comments about the patriarchy are common but lacking in balance. Obviously women not having access to the same education and voting etc is a bad thing BUT women have experienced some benefits. They drive on the same roads that men broke their backs to make. They could wear tin broaches mined at the cost of many men's lives. They lived in houses built by men. They prepared the food they are provided with by a man's labour. Should women be allowed to work in mines? Absolutely. Should women work in mines? Much more complicated

I wouldn't get too envious of the holidays abroad, all kids want is quality time with their parents. From what I've seen recently most families spend 5min trying to get the perfect picture for social media, before all of them ignore each other for hours, lost in their devices.

On the argument point, it's all about perception. My only suggestion here is to ask those you trust the most to give you an honest answer about how you come/came across.

There is nothing old fashioned in believing in differences between the genders, there are.

We are men talking about this. Would be good to hear what women actually think, especially their take on your last paragraph.

 

[Mon Autre]

I have been sexually assaulted three times by women. Total strangers. I didn’t complain. Time for a minister, though.

If you believe you were the victim of a sexual assault then you are absolutely within your rights to complain and i would recommend you report it next time.

If you didnt feel the need to complain about it or it hasn't had any long term affect on you then I'm glad for you but I also don't think that means that everyone else needs to dust themselves and move on from it, or that we shouldn't be looking at ways to tackle gender based violence.

 

[Bigga]

No, men are not 'hunter-gatherers' by nature and the impulse to provide and protect is not an inherent trait, people of all genders can have the desire to provide and protect, and are increasingly seen as shared responsibilities in modern society. You are overlooking the complexity and diversity of individuals, their experiences, and abilities.

Wow! So, from your own quote of "...the outdated stereotypes that have historically defined masculinity..." (a broad base view) that I responded to, you chose to respond back in terms of individuality of the person!!

You're saying most men, for example on Bluemoon, would not find it in their 'natural impulse' to want to provide and protect for their loved ones; i.e., a family. The individual want to provide and protect is obvious for most people, but this is a dominant and submissive culture where that happens.

For example, an individual might have that urge to look after their siblings, but that's not in absolutely everyone as why would one want to display dominance in that situation as a rule and as a grown up?

One when gets a partner, a man is much more likely to offer themselves up to danger over their partner, if they are of the opposite sex, to worker harder and longer hours jobs. This is 'inherent' in nature, part of the 'hunter-gatherer' that lies within us, the general us that is seen through statistical data... or women would be in the boxing ring, on the football field, in the front line at war with or alongside men, wouldn't they??

*There is centuries worth of evidence to show that women were seen as passive, and were denied access to education across all cultures and societies. **I don't know which part you read as a jibe or where I proposed or implied anywhere that Western Culture is 'better'.

* Of course you would respond to a point about modern society and use history in a bad faithed reply. You can go back to the 1600s to see women being educated in some society and a build up from there.

** Well, that rather depends on if your using world history for your point, which you neglect to define throughout your response, or separating the Western culture from everything else.

I disagree with this, on a night/day out you still see men approach women, it was a little more uncouth back the 90s. Also being able to cold approach a woman has absolutely nothing to do masculinity.

Let's just say that the data I keep seeing is more young men are less confident about approaching females and less young men are willing to engage through fear of rejection. I would think, based on that, that what you see is more diminished due to covid, lockdowns and women demanding more from the men out there in education and finance.

The answer to the question is that each incident of domestic violence is assessed based on its individual circumstances, regardless of the gender of the perpetrator and victim.

Sooo... yes, then! It's okay to say that.

Rights are about what individuals are entitled to, inequality is about the disparities that exist within those rights between different groups be it based on gender, race, religion, or sexuality.

And what "inequality", in this modern day and age and in Western culture, are women subjected to...?

Thanks for the initial response.