Masculism

[Fluorescent Grey]

Now I know that a sort of male equivalent of feminism might sound anti-feminist but that's not what I mean at all. Feminists stand for gender equality, and I'm not opposed to this at all. Many feminists also talk a lot about what gender means, which tends to piss me off. Some middle aged, middle class white woman telling you how to think and behave as a woman. **** off.

But I think men need to discuss gender too. I know I've just rubbished feminists doing the same but we're men so we'll do it better (joke! Or should that be Joke? Anyway I don't mean it.) I watched Grayson Perry's documentary on masculinity and found it very interesting. If you haven't seen it then I'll give you a brief synopsis - a transvestite artist goes and talks to some 'manly' men and creates a piece of art based on his experiences. So hardly dick swinging testosterone fueled anti-feminism.

I believe that there are some biological differences between men and women which affect how we behave. These are greatly magnified by societal expectations, which have more of an influence on us than we'd like to believe. Sexuality has been convincingly explained be evolutionary psychologists, though some feminists have denounced such ideas as Nazi. I think that male sexuality is something we're stuck with, and it's shit.

This isn't to make any excuses because it's 'natural' and we can't help it. A lot of shitty things are natural and saying something is natural doesn't make it good. There's an argument that racism is natural but we wouldn't excuse the KKK because of this. We can be better than that. But we have to understand the problem in order to overcome it. Feminists have a lot to say about male sexuality and I think that much of it is bullshit. We aren't trying to control and dominate women, we're just driven by dumb evolutionary drives which will always be there, but if we're aware of them then maybe we can try not be such arseholes.

Feminism was a good thing for men. Imagine when women were just expected to stand there and look pretty, or lie back and think of England. You want a ****ing mannequin for a partner? You want someone who's your equal, not some dumb pretty thing to deposit your sperm in. Those good old days were shit for women and men. Roles have changed for both of us but men haven't really discussed this properly. What does it mean to be a man now? Should it mean anything at all? I've said that I think there are some differences which are down to biology, and these serve as a basis for society's expectations, but the get hugely magnified in the process. I think that many of these expectations are damaging to men, which is why Masculism might be a good idea afterall.

[Dougella]

I saw the Grayson Perry documentary, I thought it was really interesting too.

I'm glad you think feminism has been good for men and women, I do too.

As to what it means to be a man, I can't comment as I'm not one!

[Fluorescent Grey]

^Lol what the holy mother of **** was that?

[Punxsutawney Phil]

Originally Posted by Fluorescent Grey

I think that male sexuality is something we're stuck with, and it's shit.

As a man myself I respectfully have to disagree! I rather like male sexuality.

Positive sexuality is the way forward!

[Merritt]

Originally Posted by Fluorescent Grey

This isn't to make any excuses because it's 'natural' and we can't help it. A lot of shitty things are natural and saying something is natural doesn't make it good. There's an argument that racism is natural but we wouldn't excuse the KKK because of this. We can be better than that. But we have to understand the problem in order to overcome it.

Nature is brutal, and part of the point of even having a civilisation is to rise above its cruelty and limitations. Eating your own unwelcome newborns is natural. Dying from easily curable diseases is natural (germs are just following their nature, after all) Flying in a plane, or communicating instantly with people on the other side of the world, is about as unnatural as it gets.

Whatever's in men and women's natures, levels of aggression, or being biologically programmed to want certain things, or whatever, it's fair enough to recognise them, but excusing or endorsing harmful traits because they're 'natural' is disingenuous. We suppress our nature when it conflicts with being civilised. If I went out and hunted the nearest animal and ate it raw there in the street, I'd only be doing similar to what my ancestors had done for thousands of years, and what all undomesticated carnivores have ever done, but if I couldn't resist the urge to do it there'd rightfully be consequences.

I've forgotten the point I was trying to make, other than agreeing with you, FG. Oh well. Submit Reply.

[Fluorescent Grey]

^Lol yeah. I don't think anyone understands the differences and I believe stongly in what Jesus or someone like that said - "Just try not to be a dick!" Anything you can say about gender is a generalisation and is no excuse for sexism. Some people say that men are naturally better at maths. There's evidence that this is bollocks - the more equal a society is the more test results become equal. But even if it were true that men were generally better at somethings (and women generally better at other things. No, not cooking and cleaning.) then that's no excuse for sexism. Men are generally taller than women but not all men are taller than every woman. There are women who are easily better at maths than me - more intelligent, more rational.

One idea is that men are more competitive while women are more co-operative. Generalisations again but which is better? Male testosterone fuelled ****tardery or female oestrogen fuelled let's get along? I'd go with co-operating myself rather than having to be a predator and **** people over because I'm a Tiger "****ing Grrrr".

I don't know. There's a part of us that will always be animal, and I think understanding it rather than supressing it would be the way to go. We're just animals driven by the same goals but in a far more complex way. Steven Pinker wrote a book about the "Blank Slate" that some have thought we are and why they're wrong. He mentions feminists who've been prone to this idea that we're blank slates.

If I sound critical of feminism then I'd like to make it clear that someone or other (some woman. It was Christina Hoff Sommers. Thanks Google) made a distinction between equality and gender feminists. I'm not disagreeing with equality feminists. I don't think I'm superior to women because I can write my name in the snow. Putting that on my CV hasn't made me a millionaire or anything. Gender feminists though, I have a gender too so I can say that you spend more time thinking about rape than most men. I don't want to rape anyone (Note to self: Put that on your dating profile.). Sorry, I read the Guardian and some of the shit these women come out with!

And yes men aren't all wise old philosophers either. Kelvin MacKenzie, wouldn't trust his opinion as far as I could kick him, and I'd really like to know how far this is. Get the measuring tape, this is for science Kelvin you ****in ****. Pier Morgan. Not arguing male superiority by mentioning these total *****.