[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Livia

Wow TS. I would love to show your post to Mrs TS.

No one wonders, how does he do his job? He has three kids!

My brother took five years off when his kids were born, while his wife went back to work. That's called teamwork. Children aren't the sole responsibility of the women.... unless you've jaunted back to 1950.

I was joking Livia! I mainly work evenings / weekends these days because Mrs TS is back at University, and involved in a leadership programme / a tonne of other extracurriculars with the Scottish government, NGO's and academia. I'm all for women being high earners... she's on track to be one, and then I'm going to spend the rest of my life being so lazy that I'll probably have a stroke by 55. Utter Bliss.

There are some obvious inequality issues that do need to be addressed and if there is any actual bias towards men in any institution then that is obviously a massive problem. That said, as always, I'm mostly in favour of a gender-blind merit system where people are hired and paid based on experience and ability and that's it... no quotas, no positive discrimination. That is not equality.


The only part I sort of question is the whole "BBC's highest earners are all men and that's wrong" thing... this is an issue across all entertainment media and there's very little the actual companies can do about it. People are paid based on what is attracting viewers, and for whatever reason, men seem to sell better than women. To men AND women. Is that indicative of a larger problem with society as a whole? Maybe... but it's not an issue that can be addressed by forcing it. Take Hollywood as the major example; the vast majority of the highest earners, and the AAA stars who are cast as the lead in hit movies, are men. It's not because Hollywood is sexist - although it IS sexist - but that's not the reason for the casting and pay decisions. The simple fact is... other than some notable exceptions (e.g. Wonder Woman last year), female lead films flop at the box office. Not enough people go to see them... They don't make money. That's why no one is making them, and that's why the male stars earn more.

Like I said you can see that as an issue with society as a whole but it's not going to be fixed by ensuring that an equal number of male / female films are churned out each year... and likewise, the BBC issue isn't going to be fixed by firing Graham Norton and Gary Lineker and plonking female hosts in the seats. All that would happen is a plummet in ratings and then cancellation.


I guess basically my stance is... at some point, people on all sides have to really start opening up to a proper, level-headed academic examination of gender inequalities on all sides with a view to addressing them properly, instead of simply trying to balance the numbers, and pretending that doing so actually changes anything. All of the rhetoric has become so reactionary and dogmatic that at this point it's a toxic - and therefore unsolveable - problem.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I was joking Livia! I mainly work evenings / weekends these days because Mrs TS is back at University, and involved in a leadership programme / a tonne of other extracurriculars with the Scottish government, NGO's and academia. I'm all for women being high earners... she's on track to be one, and then I'm going to spend the rest of my life being so lazy that I'll probably have a stroke by 55. Utter Bliss.

There are some obvious inequality issues that do need to be addressed and if there is any actual bias towards men in any institution then that is obviously a massive problem. That said, as always, I'm mostly in favour of a gender-blind merit system where people are hired and paid based on experience and ability and that's it... no quotas, no positive discrimination. That is not equality.


The only part I sort of question is the whole "BBC's highest earners are all men and that's wrong" thing... this is an issue across all entertainment media and there's very little the actual companies can do about it. People are paid based on what is attracting viewers, and for whatever reason, men seem to sell better than women. To men AND women. Is that indicative of a larger problem with society as a whole? Maybe... but it's not an issue that can be addressed by forcing it. Take Hollywood as the major example; the vast majority of the highest earners, and the AAA stars who are cast as the lead in hit movies, are men. It's not because Hollywood is sexist - although it IS sexist - but that's not the reason for the casting and pay decisions. The simple fact is... other than some notable exceptions (e.g. Wonder Woman last year), female lead films flop at the box office. Not enough people go to see them... They don't make money. That's why no one is making them, and that's why the male stars earn more.

Like I said you can see that as an issue with society as a whole but it's not going to be fixed by ensuring that an equal number of male / female films are churned out each year... and likewise, the BBC issue isn't going to be fixed by firing Graham Norton and Gary Lineker and plonking female hosts in the seats. All that would happen is a plummet in ratings and then cancellation.


I guess basically my stance is... at some point, people on all sides have to really start opening up to a proper, level-headed academic examination of gender inequalities on all sides with a view to addressing them properly, instead of simply trying to balance the numbers, and pretending that doing so actually changes anything. All of the rhetoric has become so reactionary and dogmatic that at this point it's a toxic - and therefore unsolveable - problem.

Yeah, I was doing something else when it occurred to me that I already know about your wife at uni etc. Bit of a sense of humour failure there for which I apologise abjectly.

I do agree with what you've said mostly... although I think the reason there are limited roles for women in Hollywood is that it's only recently that women have been recognised. It was only a couple of years ago that the first woman won Best Director. The first black actress to win Best Actress was in 2002. And it was Halle Berry. Pretty Halle Berry with her European features. So women, and indeed, lots of other groups of people, have been overlooked by Hollywood. There needs to be more women scriptwriters, producers, directors... Women make up 50% of the audience, no reason we shouldn't make up 50% of the cast and crew.

Things are changing though, I do believe that.

[Oliver_W]

Most of the big blockbusters are in the mold of scifi/action/superhero, and until recently most of the leading roles in this type of film were men. But maybe the Reys and Mystiques and Katnisses (Katni?) will help tip that a little!

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Most of the big blockbusters are in the mold of scifi/action/superhero, and until recently most of the leading roles in this type of film were men. But maybe the Reys and Mystiques and Katnisses (Katni?) will help tip that a little!

Ellen Ripley. That's all I've got to say to you, Oliver!

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Livia

We're not talking about men, we're talking about women. And women have been underpaid and underrepresented on boards forever. If they had been hired by the interview panel system I might agree. But they aren't, their agents negotiate their package and it's only recently that salaries gained in that way have begun to be disclosed in the name of clarity And what it shows clearly is that professional women are paid less than professional men. And let's face it, the BBC have paid women less forever - look at the high earners list last year, the highest earners are almost exclusively men.

Heh. This really reminded me of a fantastic article I read the other day

https://victimfocus.wordpress.com/20...hat-about-men/

I thought you may appreciate it. Its really good and so true.

After reading the article there wa sa bloke actually contacted the writers husband to check that the woman did do work for mens mental health too There were also a load of blokes attacking her on twitter about being 'sexist towards men' without actually reading the article

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Livia

Ellen Ripley. That's all I've got to say to you, Oliver!

That standout example from a few decades ago didn't change as much as current protagonists are!

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Heh. This really reminded me of a fantastic article I read the other day

https://victimfocus.wordpress.com/20...hat-about-men/

I thought you may appreciate it. Its really good and so true.

After reading the article there wa sa bloke actually contacted the writers husband to check that the woman did do work for mens mental health too There were also a load of blokes attacking her on twitter about being 'sexist towards men' without actually reading the article

Ugh, the "whataboutism" article. I've read it thoroughly and it's just trash. It really is. A big steaming pile of Facebook populism... Yet another sarky hashtag to add to the mounting cacophony of similar terms.

My response is basically this: Yes, it is misguided to say "yeah but what about ______??" as a serious response to any discussion, I totally agree with that, but to try to pretend that it's a new thing and one that mainly affects the discussions of women's issues is simply false and deeply ironic. "Whataboutism", if we have to use the term, plagues the discussion of men's mental health, rights and other issues FAR more than the other way around... To the extent that you can barely discuss it at all (in casual arenas anyway, certainly places like Facebook or twitter) without an absolute flood of "OH BOOHOO MALE TEARS what about women have had it worse for centuries".

All issues should be open for discussion without being interjected with cries of how someone else "has it worse". That SHOULD be a given and thankfully, still is in any vaguely intelligent discussion (so, again... Not Facebook or twitter).

So yeah. Her idea that this is a new thing that men have come up with to shoot down women's issues and her "clever" buzzwording is utterly useless, meaningless and misguided. Another snappy way to attempt to silence people and keep to the character limit. #****ing-yuck.

The second issue is that she claims to have knowledge of these things and yet manages to COMPLETELY miss the point. Women's and Men's mental health can't and shouldn't be compartmentalised and kept as separate issues... They are inherently interwoven, and the mental health of both depends totally on both sets of issues being respected, understood, and handled with care.

Not sarcastic phrases and hashtags that are as subtle as a sledgehammer.

[Vicky.]

but to try to pretend that it's a new thing and one that mainly affects the discussions of women's issues is simply false and deeply ironic.

Her idea that this is a new thing that men have come up with to shoot down women's issues and her "clever" buzzwording is utterly useless, meaningless and misguided.

Its not really an idea men have to shoot down womens issues I don't think. Like, its not something thats done intentionally. But it IS true (from my experience and probably a lot of other peoples too) that discussing anything to do with women brings out a lot of 'what about men' where (again in my experience, not suggesting it does not ever happen) talking about something to support men does not bring out a bunch of 'what about women'. Also (yet again from experience) it doesn't tend to be men saying 'what about the men' it seems to be women much more often!

if we have to use the term, plagues the discussion of men's mental health, rights and other issues FAR more than the other way around

Completely disagree there.

Edit. Look at one of the replies to her ffs, and the following thread https://twitter.com/jamesmglen76/sta...75181322854400

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Livia

Ellen Ripley. That's all I've got to say to you, Oliver!

Ripley also makes a good example because the original script was written with Ripley as a man... Which IMO would have made Alien a fairly big standard 80's action film. They changed it specifically to make things more interesting but it WAS considered "risky", which is the same as now... It's not that female lead films never work or that people don't want to make them, but the big studios with their hands on the purse strings consider them to be more of a "gamble" than casting a "currently popular" male star.

That's changing in general these days though, I don't think "star power" sells films as well as it used to. People like a "breakout performance" from an unknown.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

The only part I sort of question is the whole "BBC's highest earners are all men and that's wrong" thing... this is an issue across all entertainment media and there's very little the actual companies can do about it. People are paid based on what is attracting viewers, and for whatever reason, men seem to sell better than women. To men AND women.

This reminds me of when there was a huge kickoff about male sports stars being paid more than female ones. That was ridiculous as most pay comes from sponsors and obviously male sport is much more popular than womens. I believe it was tennis that the kickoff was about...now I don't watch tennis but apparently (from memory of the thread) mens games go on for much longer, as such require more effort..along with them being generally more popular. So quite why should the women get paid the same for less work, and less viewers?

I do think a lot of companies still discriminate against women though. Its a kind of 'risk of pregnancy' thing in a lot of cases. Hopefully when more men start taking their paternity leave and such, this will even out a bit (I think i read somewhere that paternity leave was increased..as it used to be a paltry 2 weeks) but I am not sure what could be done about it besides that. Its quite well known that it happens, but unless its explicitly stated that they are not hiring/promoting a woman because she may get pregnant at some stage, theres nowt that can be done. Theres always ways around whatever laws are in place

I also do disagree with positive discrimination when it comes to stuff like this. The only time a company should be specifically seeking one sex should be when its something like a caring job thats for (for example) a male patient. If the patient requests a male person for personal care, then obviously its fine to employ only male people. There is no need to be employing someone simply to fill a diversity quota. Should always go to the best person for the job. If this means the majority of staff are male, so be it. If it means the majority of staff are women, so be it. if it means the majority of staff are black, so be it. If it means the majority of staff are able-bodied..so be it (theres a scheme where if you have a disability its a guaranteed interview..thats clearly very wrong)

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Its not really an idea men have to shoot down womens issues I don't think. Like, its not something thats done intentionally. But it IS true (from my experience and probably a lot of other peoples too) that discussing anything to do with women brings out a lot of 'what about men' where (again in my experience, not suggesting it does not ever happen) talking about something to support men does not bring out a bunch of 'what about women'. Also (yet again from experience) it doesn't tend to be men saying 'what about the men' it seems to be women much more often!

The reason it brings out a lot of "what about men" is a backlash against the fact that it is very difficult to discuss men's mental health or the fact that there are many men who feel powerless or oppressed without it being shot down as some sort of massive joke. Have you genuinely not heard the term "male tears"? Or seen people keen to ignore any and all current issues facing men because men "had it better" for a long time?

What about the term "toxic masculinity" and the gender-biased blame game? That is to say, that women's issues are blamed on misandry and patriarchy, while men's issues are blamed on toxic masculinity, or in other words, the cause of women's problems is men and the cause of men's problems is... also men. It's bull****.

But this is entirely my point; ALL of these phrases and all of this rhetoric is designed to promote division and tribalism and to compartmentalise issues that can only be addressed in tandem, because otherwise, it's just endless backlash back and forth and "hilarious" battleground comment threads that do nothing for anyone other than erode compassion and generate yet more backlash.

Which is why - as I say every time these things come up - modern feminism needs to dissolve and give way to a full, proper, genuine campaign for equality based on inclusion.

Currently, it might be good for a rant and a but of brief false empowerment, but in the long run it is going to be nothing but harmful for actual equality, and anyone who actually seeks equality.

[Vicky.]

Yes I have heard male tears and phrases like that are entirely unhelpful to anything. About toxic masculinity though...I do agree that toxic masculinity hurts men in a huge way. There is the expectation that men will be 'manly' and not cry, not be sensitive and so on. I think this in turn does lead a lot of men to not seek help when they do need it.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yes I have heard male tears and phrases like that are entirely unhelpful to anything. About toxic masculinity though...I do agree that toxic masculinity hurts men in a huge way. There is the expectation that men will be 'manly' and not cry, not be sensitive and so on. I think this in turn does lead a lot of men to not seek help when they do need it.

The toxic expectation of masculinity does exist but it's a society-wide expectation... with (in my experience) women being as likely to "expect men to be manly" or - at the very least - express an increased level of appreciation for "manly men" to the extent that being "unmanly" becomes undesirable. Men also do it to each other, obviously, but if you think about it, the only reason a man would be saying those things to another man is if they felt that expectation on themselves, too. I'm not "blaming women" for it or anything like that... I'm just saying that it's an attitude that seems to apply across the board. MOST of the problematic issues do, and that's another thing that has to be recognised before any real progress can be made. Another example on the flipside would be "slut shaming"... with women being just as likely to do it to other women as men are and, similarly to the "man up" stuff, I'd say in general women are MORE harsh on other women than men are BUT as with the above - you have to ask why that would be.

But really though all I ever come back to in thinking about it is that everyone needs to stop assigning blame and tackle the whole issue as one; with a view to establishing REAL, not forced, respect and equality between men and women. I do take issue with the bulk of feminism, and that's because I get the strong impression that the movement is more about retribution than it is establishing true equality, and any quest for retribution is going to include an element of vindictiveness that in turn is only EVER going to develop into further resentment, division, and inequality.

[Northern Monkey]

Well said TS

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Most of the big blockbusters are in the mold of scifi/action/superhero, and until recently most of the leading roles in this type of film were men. But maybe the Reys and Mystiques and Katnisses (Katni?) will help tip that a little!

The Black Widow movie has been on the shelf for about a decade or more because she's a woman.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

The toxic expectation of masculinity does exist but it's a society-wide expectation... with (in my experience) women being as likely to "expect men to be manly" or - at the very least - express an increased level of appreciation for "manly men" to the extent that being "unmanly" becomes undesirable. Men also do it to each other, obviously, but if you think about it, the only reason a man would be saying those things to another man is if they felt that expectation on themselves, too. I'm not "blaming women" for it or anything like that... I'm just saying that it's an attitude that seems to apply across the board. MOST of the problematic issues do, and that's another thing that has to be recognised before any real progress can be made. Another example on the flipside would be "slut shaming"... with women being just as likely to do it to other women as men are and, similarly to the "man up" stuff, I'd say in general women are MORE harsh on other women than men are BUT as with the above - you have to ask why that would be.

But really though all I ever come back to in thinking about it is that everyone needs to stop assigning blame and tackle the whole issue as one; with a view to establishing REAL, not forced, respect and equality between men and women. I do take issue with the bulk of feminism, and that's because I get the strong impression that the movement is more about retribution than it is establishing true equality, and any quest for retribution is going to include an element of vindictiveness that in turn is only EVER going to develop into further resentment, division, and inequality.

Yes. I didn't say it was only men who are to 'blame'.

Breaking down sex stereotypes and expectations of these sex stereotypes (which are utter nonsense to most people) really should be priority for every damn person. Cause way too many issues.

Women are more harsh on women than men are as they have internalized misogyny..generally speaking. Slut shaming is almost exclusively done by women.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Heh. This really reminded me of a fantastic article I read the other day

https://victimfocus.wordpress.com/20...hat-about-men/

I thought you may appreciate it. Its really good and so true.

After reading the article there wa sa bloke actually contacted the writers husband to check that the woman did do work for mens mental health too There were also a load of blokes attacking her on twitter about being 'sexist towards men' without actually reading the article

Vicky... thank you for that. What a very interesting read. So familiar and so true.

I would urge everyone to read this. All of it. Even the bloke who comments at the end and totally proves her point.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yes I have heard male tears and phrases like that are entirely unhelpful to anything. About toxic masculinity though...I do agree that toxic masculinity hurts men in a huge way. There is the expectation that men will be 'manly' and not cry, not be sensitive and so on. I think this in turn does lead a lot of men to not seek help when they do need it.

Great post...

[Northern Monkey]

“Toxic masculinity” to me just reeks of an attack on maleness.

The irony is that women generally are more attracted to the alphas.If the feminists actually did manage to emasculate men they’d be moaning saying ‘where’s all the real men gone’.
These disingenuous male feminists who pretend to be all ‘for the cause’ to try and get jiggy usually all end up getting friendzoned and treat like cute little lapdogs.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

“Toxic masculinity” to me just reeks of an attack on maleness.

The irony is that women generally are more attracted to the alphas.If the feminists actually did manage to emasculate men they’d be moaning saying ‘where’s all the real men gone’.
These disingenuous male feminists who pretend to be all ‘for the cause’ to try and get jiggy usually all end up getting friendzoned and treat like cute little lapdogs.

It's not the feminist aim to emasculate men. I'm a feminist, I love men. I've always had far better relationships - generally - with men. I hate this kind of stuff like "toxic masculinity", it detracts from the real message, which is, we should be equal. Equal pay for equal jobs, equal access to jobs and respect going both ways.

Have you read the blog that Vicky posted about "whataboutery"? give it a go. It's very interesting.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Livia

It's not the feminist aim to emasculate men. I'm a feminist, I love men. I've always had far better relationships - generally - with men. I hate this kind of stuff like "toxic masculinity", it detracts from the real message, which is, we should be equal. Equal pay for equal jobs, equal access to jobs and respect going both ways.

Have you read the blog that Vicky posted about "whataboutery"? give it a go. It's very interesting.

Personally i think feminism was a much needed and good idea.However I believe that today now that legally we all have equal rights(more or less)it’s outdated and divisive.It should’ve quit while it was ahead on the second wave.
I want us all to be equal too but even the term ‘feminism’ is anti equality.It needs to be re-named to fit in with the modern world as there are also areas where men are ‘less equal’.
Feminism these days has a bad rap due to the extremists.Hence why only a small percentage of women identify as feminist.

And i’ll give it a read when i get time since you’ve recommended it

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

Personally i think feminism was a much needed and good idea.However I believe that today now that legally we all have equal rights(more or less)it’s outdated and divisive.It should’ve quit while it was ahead on the second wave.
I want us all to be equal too but even the term ‘feminism’ is anti equality.It needs to be re-named to fit in with the modern world as there are also areas where men are ‘less equal’.
Feminism these days has a bad rap due to the extremists.Hence why only a small percentage of women identify as feminist.

And i’ll give it a read when i get time since you’ve recommended it

Oh yes, read it Monkey. I do approve of a man who does as he's told.

Spoiler:

Kidding! I'm KIDDING!

I think we still have a long way to go in the equality stakes. Like with everything else, it's the extremists who spoil stuff, from feminism to Islam to the Labour party. We more moderate feminists would not wish to be lumped into a pigeon hole with that lot. And I genuinely think that younger men are more in favour of equality than the old guard (although of course there are many exceptions to that rule). I suppose it's the same with racism. And homophobia. It will all change.

[Vicky.]

IMO third wave feminism is pretty much a bunch of bollocks anyway from what I know of the 'terms' (which is arguably not that much)

“Toxic masculinity” to me just reeks of an attack on maleness.

I would not say that. Unless you think being male is all about being seriously masculine I would disagree that it is tbh, and I am entirely honest when I say I do not actually know that many blokes who ARE really really masculine. And either way, I certainly did not mean it as an attack on maleness.

I will not budge though on what I said about the expectation of men adhering to sex based stereotypes..hurts men though Thats not blaming men, its blaming the stereotypes. I also think the expectation to adhere to female stereotypes is detrimental to women.