Are men finished? Will our new female overlords be kind?

[Catchy Slogan]

I don't get this question. 'Are men finished?' It seems like they think that men are going to be subjugated next, and have all thier rights taken away. Just because women are 'catching up' and not being treated as the 'weaker sex'.

And it's absolutely fine for men to take paternity leave. I know of a few people who alternated maternity and paternity leave to spend the maximum amount of time with children.

Though this could just be personal bias showing through and the fact that I live in the UK.

The problem that they are talking about is that men are becoming less valued than women; not equal - but actually less valued.

Women do better in school because the educational system is set up in many ways to favor them; this is an article from your own UK:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1055395/Boys-raw-deal-school-education-tilted-favour-girls.html

Studies show that female children are actually more valued in developed nations because families favor female children over male ones.

As for your anecdotal evidence about it being "absolutely fine" for men to take paternal leave, this isn't true in the business world. Try being a top-level exec as a man and stating that you want to take time off for the birth of a child - it's a lot more accepted if you're a woman due to cultural bias.

I'm not being combative, mind you; simply asking questions that I find interested. Full disclosure - I'm a 32 year old man who has been married for 11 years to a woman I would live and die for. I have nothing against women; I simply find this subject fascinating.

Taht article in the daily mail is intirely subjective. Each and every child does not learn in the exact same way, regardless of gender. And education in the past has always been aimed at men, and this is just giving as much as a chance for women as it is men. Also, the daily mail is an appaling excuse for a newspaper, I honestly cannot take them seriously.

And the paternity thing. These high up execs need to find whats more important to them, what society thinks is 'right' or spending time with thier child.

That's not to say I think everything is perfect as it is. I know men don't get as much right to thier child as women automatically do. This is wrong on so many levels. And there seems to be a view in society that doesn't seem to care when domestic abuse happens against males. And it does, I'm willing to bet a lot more than what gets reported.

These are the kind of issues that I care about in terms of gender eqaulity, not the whining that's been going on lately that 'Oh look at this ad that makes it okay to objectify men now, and make fun of them and whine whine whine whine.

I don't really care about that. Man or woman.

 

[IceStar100]

(snip)
Nope.

If women were the wonderful, delectable angels that we sometimes think they are - why would they flock in droves to watch Twilight?

Yup, we ladies are gonna replace all the men with sparkly vampires! 'Cause they are so romaaaantic and pweeeety and seeee--GHERK HURK. ...Ahem, sorry, just coughing up one of my lungs there.

But nah, I'm fairly sure that men will stick around. At the very least we need them for reprodu--

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=asexual-lizards

Huh.

Well, looks like y'all are fucked. We'll miss you!

I was wondering what would happen to humanity when the Y chromosomes stopped getting carried on.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4225769

Huh, cool article! I guess I'm not too surprised that the Y chromosome has a way of maintaining itself; I imagine there is too much evolutionary benefit to sexual reproduction for males to just quietly and sadly die out like that. (The Y chromosome is very wee and silly and adorable though. Aww, who's a tiny lil blob of sexual dimorphism? You are! You are!) ;p

That is part of the reason guys tend to be hit harder/more often with some genetic diseases though; if a gene on the Y chromosome gets messed up there is no "good" copy for the cells to use, and the mutation is expressed. So actually it might be beneficial for the Y chromosome to copy its genes, or at least to pare away as many as possible, because there is less opportunity for Y-linked hereditary diseases. (Aw, who's a clever lil chromosome? You are!) ^^

You forgot one thing Mutation are very help too.

all known mutations have severe negative repercussions. Lrn2science.
also: in these articles we are implying that women will begin to reproduce asexually. any takers on a betting pool for that? anyone that stupid?

Lrn2Science I think you made a wrong turn http://boards.4chan.org/b/ over there.

You do relized Evolution is a mutation right. Not ever mutation turns out like sickle-cell.

Posted that for ya. enjoy the results.

also: show a mutation that is provable that did not have a negative repercussion.

Well let see here lets go back to sickle-cell the bad parts might never activate but you still gain the benfit of the ability to fight off malria

Or just from what I got off a google search.

Myostatin gene defyncey

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The only positive genetic human mutation I know about is a mutation to our myostatin gene. Myostatin is one of the proteins that inhibit skeletal muscle growth so a person with the mutation on one or both genes has increased muscle mass up to 60% more form a person with the mutation on both genes also when tested on mice the mice also showed a greater resistance to cancer forgive my spelling I am still not very good at english

With out the abiliy to mutate evolution stops. That mean one super virus would wipe out EVERYONE. Did you know the shown evdaince that people whos ancestors got the black plegue and live can't get AIDS becuase of the mutation it brough about.

 

[NeutralDrow]

Particularly men being held back from traditionally "feminine" pursuits due to supposedly impinging on their worth (implication: those pursuits are inherently lesser), while women are encouraged to drop such and pursue paths traditionally dominated by men exclusively (implication: women can be easily equal to men...they just have to act like them). The cultural issue one would hope would be at hand is more likely to get buried under stereotypes and empty rhetoric.

Really, though? I know plenty of men who wouldn't mind being stay at home dads, but their wives would indeed think less of them.

That is more-or-less precisely what I was saying.

Why don't we think less of women who choose the stay-at-home-mom route?

We do. It's just not an overt contempt, due to the inertia of the idea that that's what they should be doing. Traditionally feminine pursuits or women's work are not held in the same esteem as those attributed to men; therefore, men should be aiming for something "better," but it's perfectly all right for a woman to remain at that level.

http://mediamatters.org/research/200605160002

...you didn't actually read that, did you.

It's basically 25% repeating what that Stossel guy said, and the remainder pointing out statistics that suggest he's full of crap. Which is pretty convenient, since he doesn't really seem to say much different from the other two links (save that he doesn't sound like he's two steps away from a misogynistic rant, nor does he sound like he's preaching to a choir).

Also, far be it from me to criticize your choice of references, since I'm willingly using <url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male%E2%80%93female_income_disparity_in_the_United_States#Sources_of_the_gender_gap>this one, but still...

Third of all, the issue of education; just one link of dozens:

Boys are getting a raw deal because the education system dramatically favours girls, a leading academic has warned.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1055395/Boys-raw-deal-school-education-tilted-favour-girls.html

If there are really dozens of links you could have used, why did you use one that makes no sense in the argument at hand? Granted, it's Daily Mail, so I probably shouldn't be surprised that they're trying to elevate holding all students to a single standard of education to be discriminatory, somehow (rather than simply inadvisable, for far more reasons than are stated there), but I'd kinda hoped for something more relevant.

 

[ralfy]

It's probably best to look up this issue in light of debt-ridden industrialized societies and the long-term effects of a resource crunch.

 

[Yopaz]

Actually your culture is behind ours there. Here men and women can share the time they spend home with kids equally, men actually get paid by their job to stay home with the kids while the mother can go back to work.
It's not always so, but it can be done and it is done on a higher scale from year to year.

But to stop nitpicking women tend to be less aggressive than men. Men will push aside anyone with force stab anyone's back, while women tend to be a bit more subtle. In some ways women have always ruled, and will always rule. In other ways men will always rule. In the big picture I don't think the balance will shift too much.

And if it did then unlike you I live in a country that was once ruled by a woman and you know what? It wasn't that different.

 

[IrisEver]

*tl;dr*
Will our new female overlords be kind?

No. We will not be 'kind', but we will treat you well. I like to think there is a differece.

Now please excuse me, there seems to be some trouble in the depths of my stronghold. I think my men-slaves are squabbling over who gets to use the blanket I provided for them again and it's causing a ruckus. Blasted ingrates, I'll have their heads for this.

 

[Caverat]

Wow, the degree of sexism in the responses castigating the original article for sexism is hilarious. Way to go, Internets.

No, women will never dominate men in a way that remotely resembles the way that men still dominate women. Men will never live in fear of being randomly brutalized by women. Men will never make 25%+ less than women just because they are men. Men will never have their penises skinned and sewn shut.

I agree with the poster who said that a lot of the fear of a gynochracy is a knee-jerk reaction by men who recognize the loss of their time-honored, dearly-held privilege and the women who help to reinforce it. To them, I say

GET. OVER. IT.

EDIT:

Who fucking cares!?

Women, maybe?

Yo, that whole men making 25% more for the same work argument is bullshit. If that was even true, who in their right mind would hire men? Seriously, if you could hire a worker that performed just as well for 3/4 of the pay, why would you ever hire someone who you'd pay 25% more, just cuz?

So, if men and women perform the same at work, but it's acceptable to pay women less, no one would hire men, to save money. Either this 25% pay difference isn't true, or there's a reason for it.

That reason? Maternity leave. The hiring of a female employee means an employer is more likely to be legally required to provide leave because of a pregnancy (Women being the ones who get pregnant and all), meaning a saved job for an employee who isn't contributing, and "wasted" money in required pay for a worker that isn't producing.

True, there is a rise in paternity leave, the majority of this leave is still being given to women though. When it is an equal 50/50 split in leave being granted for this kind of thing, the pay should be the same consistently, until then, a difference is maybe not justified, but certainly not unreasonable.

More reliable/consistent workers, probability-wise, deserve slightly more pay.

GET. OVER. IT.

As for the genital mutilation thing, trust me, most men are against that to, that is a cultural practice, and is recognized as dangerous and unnecessary by anyone with a lick of sense.

 

[nolongerhere]

(snip)
Nope.

If women were the wonderful, delectable angels that we sometimes think they are - why would they flock in droves to watch Twilight?

Yup, we ladies are gonna replace all the men with sparkly vampires! 'Cause they are so romaaaantic and pweeeety and seeee--GHERK HURK. ...Ahem, sorry, just coughing up one of my lungs there.

But nah, I'm fairly sure that men will stick around. At the very least we need them for reprodu--

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=asexual-lizards

Huh.

Well, looks like y'all are fucked. We'll miss you!

I was wondering what would happen to humanity when the Y chromosomes stopped getting carried on.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4225769

Huh, cool article! I guess I'm not too surprised that the Y chromosome has a way of maintaining itself; I imagine there is too much evolutionary benefit to sexual reproduction for males to just quietly and sadly die out like that. (The Y chromosome is very wee and silly and adorable though. Aww, who's a tiny lil blob of sexual dimorphism? You are! You are!) ;p

That is part of the reason guys tend to be hit harder/more often with some genetic diseases though; if a gene on the Y chromosome gets messed up there is no "good" copy for the cells to use, and the mutation is expressed. So actually it might be beneficial for the Y chromosome to copy its genes, or at least to pare away as many as possible, because there is less opportunity for Y-linked hereditary diseases. (Aw, who's a clever lil chromosome? You are!) ^^

You forgot one thing Mutation are very help too.

all known mutations have severe negative repercussions. Lrn2science.
also: in these articles we are implying that women will begin to reproduce asexually. any takers on a betting pool for that? anyone that stupid?

Lrn2Science I think you made a wrong turn http://boards.4chan.org/b/ over there.

You do relized Evolution is a mutation right. Not ever mutation turns out like sickle-cell.

Posted that for ya. enjoy the results.

also: show a mutation that is provable that did not have a negative repercussion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CCR5

CCR5-&#916;32 is a mutation of CCR5 resulting from a deletion of a 32-bp segment. It causes the receptor to be non-functional. This appears to protect against HIV and smallpox, and is present in about 10% of northern Europeans, and those of northern European descent. It also leaves them more susceptible to West Nile Virus. However, this is not really a problem in northern Europe.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

Most feminists want equality, this one sounds like she wants to be the majority.

I have met a few feminists, their mentality reminds me of those made-for-tv movies how a woman is treated at the hands of a male orientated system. Personally I suspect that's why a few of them want to overthrow the current gender dominated system; So they can get their own bit of revenge.

Most countries have gender equality now, here in Australia I have worked in lots of places alongside females. They have had the same pay rates as me every single time. A lot of countries have had female leaders, have to agree that they generally haven't done any better than their male counterparts.

I saw this MadTV skit, however long ago, it was a parody of that submarine movie Crimson Tide. Except the crew were all female, and their cycles were synchronized (hence the name; Crimson Tide), the Captain nuked a country because of a bad hormonal shift. Not really relevant, but I always remember it whenever I hear females saying they would do a better job if they were in charge.

Nah, men aren't done for.

 

[cobra_ky]

i sure as hell am not finished. i can't speak for the rest of you lads, though. if you want to curl up in a corner and cry about all those mean girls oppressing you, then go right ahead i guess. but that's not how feminism or the women's rights movements succeeded.

 

[___________________]

And if all else fails and we felt threatened we could turn on the testosterone switch and trample them all with brute force.

 

[UnknownGunslinger]

Spoiler

Despite a feminist persistence that women are still somehow subjugated in America, it's clear that even if you think this - women are catching up. And fast. More women attend college now than men, the wage gap is either closing or completely nonexistent if you account for things like women being free to stay home and raise children while it is still culturally unacceptable for men to do so (or to take time off from work to help raise a child) - etc.

Slate magazine is doing an interesting online debate on this:

http://www.slate.com/id/2303488/

Please *don't* reply to the thread with a knee jerk response until you read the link to understand my point for posting this. Thank you in advance. (The last time I tried posting a link 75% of the people couldn't be bothered to click on it, read it, and understand what the heck I was talking about before responding full of outrage and bluster.)

Ahem.

Anyway, Slate is hosting an online debate and while I don't expect everyone here to partake, it's an interesting theory. Some choice tidbits from the article:

Women now earn the majority of college degrees. Men play video games. Women thrive in information-age jobs. Men go to prison. Women hold families together. Men watch football. On Tuesday, Sept. 20, the Slate/Intelligence Squared U.S. live debate series will ask and answer a fundamental question about modern society: Are men finished?

And I think for a long time the question has been... are they? More and more people, in fact, for the first time ever - a majority of people - in the U.S. have stated that they would prefer a female child to a male child for their own family. Schools seem set up to teach to girls, not boys. (Boys are medicated with ADHD medication, apparently a disease that "afflicts" 9% of the boys in America but only 1/50th of that in Japan - must be something in the U.S. water supply.)

If you're interested in Slate's debate, this is another blurb:

The debate proposition is "men are finished." What does that actually mean? A modern, post-industrial economy that seems better suited to women than men has led many experts to wonder if men are being permanently left behind.

So is that how the future will be? Are men finished?

Will our new female overlords be kind?

I reckon the US might really have a problem as you said.
I've been seeing increasingly more debates on those problems from variety of places.
I guess young boys really are failing in the Education system, and that there will be a gender gap for the coming generations.

Here are some TED talks on the subject that you might find interesting, the first is about using Gaming in education, and the second is by Philip Zimbardo and a lot more Doomsday-e, but he has interesting points never the less


I don't think the reason is because women are inherently super humans who are rightfully taking their position as leaders of the world
That's bull, I don't think there are such differences between the two genders, they are inherently equal, plus this is a phenomenon that's confined only in the US at the moment.
Which points to a problem in that demographic, and not a global phenomena!
Something is happening with young males in America!
Perhaps it's the loss of male identity in the society, I don't know?

 

[Rayne870]

Now is a bad time to be reading the Dune series and learning about the future of man as breeding stock.

 

[nuba km]

I think I have the cliff notes of this debate somewhere, just let me look *rummages through desk* ah here they are *clears throat*

no, men have their advantages and women have their advantages. People a flout and this is due to our society and things like this have to be solved over many generation and cultural shifts.

I think that covers it.

 

[joshuaayt]

That article:
I read from here:
"Women now earn the majority of college degrees. Men play video games. Women thrive in information-age jobs. Men go to prison. Women hold families together. Men watch football."

...to here:
"Ladies, give yourself a night off from your second job as an astronaut or neurosurgeon. Men, take a break from your fantasy football league to see if you can save yourself"

...before just closing the tab.

Anyway. Developed nations are becoming more equal, not less- I don't think any gender has a thing to worry about. We are a bit shaky, at the moment, but that's because equality is still a new thing- people need to come to terms with the idea of men succeeding in "female" roles, and women just need a while to catch up, because fair education and government is new enough that they just have not had the time to reach those senior roles.

I give it 10-15 years, watch those women share the stage in government, and watch those guys start getting custody of the baby folk. Aw, yeah, it's a good time to live... in terms of gender equality, anyway.

 

[iRevanchist]

I for one welcome our new female overlords.

fellow ladies, this one shall be the last to die.

 

[DarksideFlame]

As long as any of those crazy militant feminists that hates men and claim that they fight for equality between men and women while actually wanting to make women superior get's to govern countries then it might not be as different from the way we live now

But, I don't think women will take over anytime soon for me it's more likely that they will become equally treated

Also who the fuck wrote this article? "Ladies, take a break from your second job as neurosurgeon or astronaut" and "Men take a break from your fantasy football league and see if you can save yourself?"

What the fuck?

 

[Bobbity]

Haha, I love these sorts of naive questions.

No, females are not the dominant force in society; far from it. Everything that the OP mentioned is a stereotype, and not necessarily true. This is very similar to the question that Fox News loves to ask, "Is the white anglo-saxon male now a minority?" The answer to which is, of course, hell no. People sensationalise societal changes, and blow them totally out of proportion.

In other words, this thread is pointless because it's wrong; women are still oppressed all over the world, and even in first world countries, they're seriously underrepresented. To imply that they're now the dominant societal force is wrong on so many levels that it makes my head hurt. And to be worried about it?

 

[Silenttalker22]

LOL Christ, that is one of the least reasonably-assembled written pieces I've ever read, while claiming to want to hear legitimate discussion.
Funny in an embarrassing way, very funny; but grounds for a real discussion, hardly.

 

[Iron Mal]

I agree with you here.

Personally, I don't see why it isn't possible for women having equal rights to also allow more opportunities for men.

Why shouldn't 18-25 year old women in the US need to fill out a selective service draft card?

Why isn't being a stay-at-home-dad considered just as noble of an occupation as being a stay-at-home-mom?

It is unfortuneate that the main theories and beliefs behind feminism (which I can get behind, everyone should be equal in my opinion) has become somewhat tainted by the rigid minded and vengence driven idiots who seem to be more interested in 'winning the war of the sexes' or otherwise claiming dominance rather than actually trying to promote any form of equality.

Yeah, not all of feminism is like that but when you get very vocal members of your community who either sound like Nazis or misandrists then it's not exactly hard to see why people apply that generalising label to them (and it isn't entirely unjustified either).