Anyone else bothered by the increased blurring of gender roles?

[Kiefer13]

In a word, no.

I think it's a damn good thing actually. Gender roles are outdated and are becoming increasingly irrelevant in modern day society. People should be treated as individuals and judged on their individual merits and personalities, not by whichever set of genitalia they happen to possess.

The fact is that both the traditional "masculine" gender role and the traditional "feminine" gender role have their good points as well as their bad points. The key is, as with most things, balance. Why don't we take the good from both and cast out the bad, then start teaching our children not to be "manly men" and "girly girls", but well rounded and balanced human beings?

 

[Daveman]

Speaking as a pussy I don't enjoy being sensitive. Empathy sucks. I'd get laid loads if I didn't give a shit. I wish I could click my fingers and turn into that hard man.

But then again I hate guys like that so I'd probably rather kill myself before mutilating my personality in such a way.

 

[D0WNT0WN]

How are these boys going to group up to be leaders of men and protectors of women?

Well, not, obviously. And women don't need men to protect them.

Not anymore atleast. Welcome to the 21st Century everyone, there is no need to protect your women from other tribes, bears and tigers.

Im fine with women taking on other roles it makes no difference to me, there are two girls in my Engineering Course and they deal with everything just aswell as the guys. I dont like the feminisation of males though or the super feminazis who are basically hypocrites in their own right they think that they can have all the pros of having a non gender specific society and disregard the cons because it is "Unfair To Females".
Male feminisation really pisses me off though. Im fine with self improvement, it is something that everyone should strive for but when you see a guy with his hair dyed, wearing skinny jeans and eye liner I know it has gone to far.

Japan is quite guilty of this.

what's wrong with it? I find androgynous guys extremely hot. and as I said earlier in the thread, the way they dress doesn't impact any of their physical characteristics if that's what you're worried about.

I didnt say anything was wrong with it, It just doesnt sit well with me. I guess your opinion of androgyny comes with your upbringing. My Dad was quite a piece of work and I guess some of his opinions on gender roles, homosexuality and the like rubbed off on me. I always remember him telling me not to cry whenever I hurt myself and considering I was quite the crybaby when I was younger it didnt do me any good.

I just think men should look and act (to a degree) like men and women should do the same. Im fine with the blurring of gender roles and im good with women doing what they want but it doesnt sit well with me when dudes start getting androgynious.

(It irked me with Final Fantasy games aswell)

 

[Jaded Scribe]

And you would also understand that our biology is not 100% based on our gender. ...
You keep talking about how you are wired a certain way, and that must completely be because you are male. This is so incredibly false that it blows my mind.

I never said that. I also never said that everyone (or every man) is like me. My point always was that people are different. What I use are GENERALIZATIONS and EXAMPLES. Starting points, if you will. The starting points for my claims are obviously elsewhere than yours, but that's where discussion should begin, not quick dismission, like you do.

I did discuss your starting points. I pointed out that many of these could be ascribed to social issues, experiences in how you were raised, and biological issues that weren't related to gender. I did not dismiss your points out of hand, but simply pointed out where your premises were flawed, and in conflict with most reliable studies.

I'm a writer, that means two things: I don't publish what I didn't think thoroughly; and if I want to elaborate on something, it takes longs pages to work out all the details. Thus on the internet forum, I pick out small examples to base the discussion on. You are the one who assumes everyone who disagrees with you must be stupid.

I assume nothing. I have never said that you were stupid. I feel your arguments hold no water and are based on opinions and misinformation rather than facts, but I never dismissed you as stupid for disagreeing with me. Right now, you come across as just trying to find a way to justify the fact that I'm disagreeing with you, and that because I disagree with you and feel you have a poor argument that I must be an elitist.

And this comes back to another point, the benefits of a formal education. Self-educating on the internet leads you to a bunch of bullshit, with no basis for how to tell the good information from the bad.

Again I said that you need education if you want to be a doctor or whatever. Lots of other stuff can be learned by self-study. Even nuclear physics and astronomy if you want. Internet, libraries, or university, one always have to learn to distinguish valid from invalid. Those programmers I mentioned can do much more than just make hello world. They have learned very advanced programming techniques by themselves.

I'm sure they are self-taught, and are very good at what they do. That doesn't change the fact that they likely got into the industry when it was possible to do so as self-taught. Now, unless you have years of experience (like your friends do), your resume will very likely be thrown out without a second glance if you don't have a college education.

Is it possible to get work when you're self-taught? Sure. But it will be much harder to get far. Instead of starting out making $40-$50k/year at a large company with alot of room for advancement, you'll be in a much lower paying job, at a much smaller company and it will take you years to reach the same paylevel and position as your fresh-out-of-college counterparts.

Self-study also results in lopsided education as people only look at the areas of a topic that interest them. Your friends probably know a lot about procedural and object-oriented paradigms. How deeply have they looked at functional and logical languages? Do they understand how to critique a language and recognize all of its strengths and weaknesses and use that knowledge to choose the right language for the task at hand? do they understand Assembly language, and exactly how a compiler translates and builds their software?

The list goes on. A good, comprehensive education program will produce a stronger and more well-rounded professional. There are exceptions, but in general, self-taught people are at a distinct disadvantage.

Having studied psychology and biology in a formal setting, with textbooks that required a review of other masters of the field rather than any jackass with an internet connection, I think I have a much better basis of understanding in this topic than you do.

You think and I think you are wrong. You just proved my point: despite studying psychology, you have problems understanding people. Haven't they taught you not to use terms like 'bullshit' and 'jackass'?

I have trouble understanding people? I understand people very well. I have looked at each of your arguments logically. If I haven't seen your points clearly, while some of the fault may be on my misunderstanding, but at least some of it lays on a lack of clarity on your part.

And, to answer your sarcastic comment trying to belittle me to make yourself feel better, I have been taught not to use "bullshit" and "jackass". And in formal writings, I don't. But as you yourself said, this is an informal forum. Therefore, I speak a little more bluntly.

btw: notice that despite all this disagreeing, not even once have I equaled your views to being female. Someone so deep in gender issues probably would, don't you think?

/discussion

Maybe, maybe not. Some may have avoided it because they would know that blaming my views on being female would quickly be shot down, given the general tone of most people in this forum.

 

[Sleepingzombie]

In my belief; There is no genders and there is "really" no difference between how men and women "are wired". In short: it varies from person to person.

Some women are like men and vice versa and I beliave it is something you decide for yourself, like "queer theory". I belieave there is some parts of a man and a woman in all of us, like the DISC-theory by Marston : We all have parts of the four different personalities.

The differences that exists like different body thinygs dont make any impact.

Most importantly: ones view of this is influenced by your experenses and these "molds" cannot be said to apply to all. This planet is a big place after all.

 

[Mackie Stingray]

Really? Because I have many personal anecdotes with female friends, my mother, girlfriends, and even random female strangers that suggest otherwise.

You did not grow up in my family, I can tell that much. The women of my family could'a kicked my ass. This should not portray me as a pansy, as I was more than willing to stand up for myself and was in a great many pointless fights throughout public school, but it happens the women in my household were pretty tough ladies.

Despite what lemon-scented

What?

...crunchy-granola...

Wait, granola should be soft? Why?

...liberals...

Wait, what? Since when is feminism an exclusively liberal value? It started as much as anything in conservative circles, and there remains a strong contingent of female-positive conservatives in the -- Wait, I'm getting a notion here.

...like to scream about in their podcasts,

P-- wait, since when are podcasts a liberal thing? This backs up a notion I'm getting...

men protecting women is not misogynistic at all.

Well, no. Nor was it misandrogynist (or what-have-you) for the ladies in my household to stand up for me.

You're an odd duck, man. Must not be NW/NE folk. Actually, I've seldom even spoken to midwesterners with as muddled a notion of political divides as you, so I'm inclined to assume you're from outside the US. Many here are.
You wanna see some interesting gender roles? Come check out the US. It's not as bad as people portray it, not quite as backward, though if you're from a place with considerable gun control laws, you may feel a bit nervous around here. But here in the US, podcasts aren't just a liberal thing! You'll find lots of conservative commentators taking their message public by that medium as well.
I'm thinking... Iran, perhaps? Podcasts would be a liberal thing in Iran.

 

[DuctTapeJedi]

[
I didnt say anything was wrong with it, It just doesnt sit well with me. I guess your opinion of androgyny comes with your upbringing. My Dad was quite a piece of work and I guess some of his opinions on gender roles, homosexuality and the like rubbed off on me. I always remember him telling me not to cry whenever I hurt myself and considering I was quite the crybaby when I was younger it didnt do me any good.

I just think men should look and act (to a degree) like men and women should do the same. Im fine with the blurring of gender roles and im good with women doing what they want but it doesnt sit well with me when dudes start getting androgynious.

(It irked me with Final Fantasy games aswell)

But who defines what men and women do and how they act? Also, you seem to contradict yourself in the next statement.

So, I'm a female who is involved in construction trades, wears no make-up, and spends almost no time on my hair. Does this bother you?

Personally, I prefer the blurring of gender roles, as opposed to the hyper-sexualization of young girls today. (revealing clothing, etc. It's fine when you're an adult, that's your call to make. But when a twelve year old wears tons of make up and short skirts, it just sort of seems screwed up.)

 

[Brawndo]

Really? Because I have many personal anecdotes with female friends, my mother, girlfriends, and even random female strangers that suggest otherwise.

You did not grow up in my family, I can tell that much. The women of my family could'a kicked my ass. This should not portray me as a pansy, as I was more than willing to stand up for myself and was in a great many pointless fights throughout public school, but it happens the women in my household were pretty tough ladies.

Despite what lemon-scented

What?

...crunchy-granola...

Wait, granola should be soft? Why?

...liberals...

Wait, what? Since when is feminism an exclusively liberal value? It started as much as anything in conservative circles, and there remains a strong contingent of female-positive conservatives in the -- Wait, I'm getting a notion here.

...like to scream about in their podcasts,

P-- wait, since when are podcasts a liberal thing? This backs up a notion I'm getting...

men protecting women is not misogynistic at all.

Well, no. Nor was it misandrogynist (or what-have-you) for the ladies in my household to stand up for me.

You're an odd duck, man. Must not be NW/NE folk. Actually, I've seldom even spoken to midwesterners with as muddled a notion of political divides as you, so I'm inclined to assume you're from outside the US. Many here are.
You wanna see some interesting gender roles? Come check out the US. It's not as bad as people portray it, not quite as backward, though if you're from a place with considerable gun control laws, you may feel a bit nervous around here. But here in the US, podcasts aren't just a liberal thing! You'll find lots of conservative commentators taking their message public by that medium as well.
I'm thinking... Iran, perhaps? Podcasts would be a liberal thing in Iran.

Decent effort, but you're not clever.

 

[Kortney]

I'm not bothered by it at all. It's just another social trend and people are free to express themselves however they wish.

 

[Kortney]

But I do think that men and women have certain innate traits that make them better suited for different things.

Whilst that is (to a degree) true - those traits are not innate. They seem it, but study after study has confirmed that those "innate" traits are the work of our society and culture.

Let's take the example of women being more likely to display empathy. While this is true it is merely a replica of the lessons, both conscious and subconscious, they have learnt through our society. Through their friends, their parents, the media and art. Through body language and through speech. It certainly isn't inherit to them.

As soon as a baby is born we, as a society, fill it's head with the "norms" of how to act. I was taught to cook, clean, sing and be gentle. My brothers were taught to fight, work and play sport. Some lessons however, are not so obvious. Subtle things we put into our children's heads are what toys we buy them to play with. What behavior we encourage. What colour we decorate their room. What gender role models we place in front of them.

Those "innate" gender roles you described earlier are nothing more than the product of an amazingly huge amount of learning children do.

But yes. You are right. In today's society men and women are better suited to do different things. It's just not inherit.

 

[Mackie Stingray]

Decent effort, but you're not clever.

That answers no questions whatsoever.

 

[ramboondiea]

yeah i agree with you, i think some lines are okay to blur, but lately this androgynous wave thats seems to be sweeping the youths has me worried,
my worry comes from the idea that if people aint as 'manly' they could face more ridicule, and to say that a man shouldnt need to be a protector is bullshit, plain and simple, where you like it or not, men on average will be stronger then a women (physically) i literally couldnt count all the times iv had to get involved to protect a friend from unwanted advances or violent behaviour of dickheads. so if we have a wave of weaker, more afraid young men, then yeah some women could be in danger

the most androgynous man I know also happens to be the strongest. Claiming that girly = weak is BS, hell after finishing the teen years I'd bet "girly" guys on average are in better shape than regular guys because they have to work to keep a trim toned figure.
And again women don't need men for protection anymore than men need other men for protection. If you've taken even basic self defense theory you'd know size isn't that big an issue unless the person is twice your size at least. And untrained man is as vulnerable as an untrained woman, and a trained woman is as dangerous as a trained man. The problem isn't that women are weaker (they are physically weaker but not enough to make a difference if trained) it's that women are discouraged from taking fighting/self defense classes cause it's not "lady like."

i wasnt claiming girly=weak, i was just making a comment based on my obsevations, i know quite a few androgynous men, and by large they are physically weak, il admit there probably healthier then me, but they arnt toned as much as just being skinny.
i took self-defence, boxing and karate when i was a little younger, so yeah i know size isnt that much of an issue, that is providing the smaller individual is well trained and even if they are trained look at boxing, send a heavy weight into the ring with a feather weight and see how long that fight lasts.
and most of the women i know havnt been discouraged from taking self-defence they just dont want to, infact the girliest girl i know takes mixed martial arts, but the fact is she is a 5'1 girl and can easily be disabled with a hug from some one 6'+, raw strength is still an important factor which you have ruled out far to quickly

 

[ramboondiea]

yeah i agree with you, i think some lines are okay to blur, but lately this androgynous wave thats seems to be sweeping the youths has me worried,
my worry comes from the idea that if people aint as 'manly' they could face more ridicule, and to say that a man shouldnt need to be a protector is bullshit, plain and simple, where you like it or not, men on average will be stronger then a women (physically) i literally couldnt count all the times iv had to get involved to protect a friend from unwanted advances or violent behaviour of dickheads. so if we have a wave of weaker, more afraid young men, then yeah some women could be in danger

the most androgynous man I know also happens to be the strongest. Claiming that girly = weak is BS, hell after finishing the teen years I'd bet "girly" guys on average are in better shape than regular guys because they have to work to keep a trim toned figure.
And again women don't need men for protection anymore than men need other men for protection. If you've taken even basic self defense theory you'd know size isn't that big an issue unless the person is twice your size at least. And untrained man is as vulnerable as an untrained woman, and a trained woman is as dangerous as a trained man. The problem isn't that women are weaker (they are physically weaker but not enough to make a difference if trained) it's that women are discouraged from taking fighting/self defense classes cause it's not "lady like."

i wasnt claiming girly=weak, i was just making a comment based on my obsevations, i know quite a few androgynous men, and by large they are physically weak, il admit there probably healthier then me, but they arnt toned as much as just being skinny.
i took self-defence, boxing and karate when i was a little younger, so yeah i know size isnt that much of an issue, that is providing the smaller individual is well trained and even if they are trained look at boxing, send a heavy weight into the ring with a feather weight and see how long that fight lasts.
and most of the women i know havnt been discouraged from taking self-defence they just dont want to, infact the girliest girl i know takes mixed martial arts, but the fact is she is a 5'1 girl and can easily be disabled with a hug from some one 6'+, raw strength is still an important factor which you have ruled out far to quickly

you're using anecdotes to generalize all androgynous men. Just because the ones you know are weak doesn't mean the majority is. You have no data to back up your statements, just hearsay.
I didn't discount strength, I said it wasn't that much of a factor until you got to around twice your size after which you're pretty much screwed, man or woman. A man that's 5'1" is going to be just as easily disabled by a 6' monster as a girl that's 5'1", but signaling women out in all this is ridiculous.

so you mean the sae as you? saying the strongest person you know is androgynous therefore all androgynous men must be lean and strong? all we have to base our assumptions on are what we know and witness, im not some behavioural psychologist nor am i a physical researcher, so yeah my statements are based on my own observations, as are yours, that is unless you have data on it, well do you?
and no i disagree with size being a major issue issue, i know a really short fellow whoes a trained martial artist, like you said training makes a big difference, but hes also a little brick shithouse, the reason being when he was young he went out training, he played sports, he did fighting and training, now a days they dont make children do this, which is causing this gender line to blur but in a negative way. i dont think children are getting any motivation to do things anymore, all because people are saying its archaic or sexist to hold to any of the past gender stereotypes. i just think it could case a issue
and i not so much as singling women out, as im making a note that on AVERAGE mens physical growth outclasses womens physical growth

 

[ramboondiea]

so your example was not a generalisation and yet the use of a single example compleatly proves me wrong? you see the flaw there right? also why are you trying to prove me wrong? this is a purely opinionated thread? no one is right or wrong, thats why i haven't attacked your opinon, merely explained my point of view
and no i think its the school systems that are afraid of being politically incorrect, the result being mixed gender physical classes which leads to toned down physical activities, this along with a current culture that doesnt use typical gender frameworks is leading to a more androgynous male youth population, also i never said it was sport alone, as iv just pointed out i believe political correctness is a factor, which as lead to, as you put it 'the relaxing expectation of young men' this lacked expectation means theres no motivation given to children which i believe will lead to weaker generations (no not everyone, but more then there is now)

and im not talking about training, im on about natural growth, men develop longer then women in stature, (on average) so even with no training involved a man will more likely be stronger then a women, also lets look at your statement that women are encouraged to be skinny? this is achieved through gym and heathly eating, this is infact a good thing as it leads to better health and a stronger body, its places like this that gender roles need to remain, blurring in some areas is perfectly fine, but surely that doesnt mean all gender roles should be disregarded