Comments on: The feminisation of man

By: Jerry

Jerry — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 23:30:41 +0000

Steven, I notice that you’re in the UK; things as you describe them, are pretty much the same in Australia. There’s a lot of double standards happening here only these days the bias is against men. If I knew how to go about it, I’d gather as many like minded men together and try for changes in advetisements. There may be a push for feminised men, but given some adverts I’ve seen, it seems not to be happening quickly enough for women. In our ads women are smart and men are brutes or dopes. The one sided bias has even leaked into childrens’ ads.

By: Bryan

Bryan — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:52:12 +0000

There is a statistical phenomenon called the ‘normal’ curve. It exists in amazing places in nature, and even in human behaviours. This phenomenon allows us to find serial killers, test new drugs, and even help us ‘measure’ the efficacy of teaching methods. It is in line with this curve that ‘masculine’ or ‘feminine’ behaviours need to be understood. In nature, variety is the key as by far and away most will display particular bias to masculine or feminine, and as earlier described by Soumya, characteristics of particular types. Masculine women exist, and need to be free and proud as feminine men. But they will always, by nature, be in the minority. This is as true of the genius, as the moron as the gay as the straight.
It is this phenomenon which makes ‘war and risk the business of men’ and ‘having children and safety’ the business of women, statistically speaking. Of course there are variations across gender, but most will always fall into the ‘normal’ for want of a better word curve.
So here is the rub. As any political society becomes more ordered, ’safe’, policed and rule oriented it becomes a safe place for the elevation of women to power and status. The trouble is very few societies can attain such a level of safety in a sufficiently short time. Young males, wanting and needing ‘risk’ will be increasingly stifled in such a society and unlike a group of women, who will use political process, they are biased to using their physical strength to effect change. Most young men use their physical strength to protect, not violate. But a feminised society will inherently view that physical strength as needing to be controlled. In other words, an ‘equal’ society will want that strength to be placed in militaristic, and strongly controlled political hands. Girls like horses (powerful creatures), but only when they are well controlled and safe. There is a bias to dressage rather than the ‘brumby’. Women like politics, but preferably well controlled and safe. Interestingly, most men like wild, free, risky and dangerous. They recognise rules but will push the boundaries even from adolescence. Why? I think because nature, God or both gave them physical strength. They can physically ‘take’ what they want. Note though that most men don’t. Men like competition, but a feministic society, which ‘competes’ on its terms means, rules, regulation and censure biased toward safety. That’s okay, as long as wars don’t happen, criminals don’t rape and everyone follows rules.

This is why, such societies imprison large numbers of their men, have large militaries and police forces and usually have a very active criminal or rebel component to the same society. There is always a strong call politically to ban the dangerous or risky (ie, guns, hunting, fireworks, risky driving or just breaking rules) which is always predominately ‘male’, and exalt hospitals, police forces and government regulation which are concerned primarily with safety and security. Usually these are noble pursuits all, but a push does exist to ‘remove’ the male pursuits, which are seen as dangerous.

This social engineering has had an effect in Australia which,frankly, I find scary. That is that many young men who used to be young boys I talk too, no longer see women as needing any form of protection. They believe women can ‘look after themselves’ and even though they know ‘jerks’, wife beaters and abusers, they say to me they ‘feel’ no obligation to intervene, guy to guy. They leave it to the ‘law’.
I have asked what they would do if Australia was threatened by war. They say it depends. Very few of the sort of guys who I think would make effective and deadly soldiers, say they would sign up for ‘heroism under orders’ as Einstein said. They see a feminine political government as incapable of waging war. They see army as suicide. They say they would fight, but as a hidden militia against the enemy. Their sense of duty and allegiance seems to have taken a serious hit over the last 25 years. Why? I can only logically think that the huge increase in fines, rules and regulation of all things enjoyed by males, meaning young men can have a ‘criminal’ record just for being male. Young men are ‘disenfranchised’ very quickly in Australia if you can’t follow rules. Instead of that strength and unruliness being ‘directed’ as in the past (ie my generation in the 60’s) it is ‘treated’ in the view of young men as the female primary teacher telling ‘Johnny’ to sit in the corner and be quiet, while the ‘good little girls’ titter. The end result I feel may be that the ‘good little girls’ will be left standing alone against the rapist, the enemy soldier with nothing more than ‘girl power’ to protect them.

By: Saper Agency

Saper Agency — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 08:18:43 +0000

I guess it all comes down to your viewpoint or as some may say orientation
How much is real ?
How much is viewpoint or evaluation
On the other hand one must take a stand and have a viewpoint
Otherwise it is all wishy washy and leads nowhere in the end of it all

By: Bobo

Bobo — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 03:09:21 +0000

Go to any blog anywhere in the net, pick a topic, any topic, it doesn’t matter and sooner or later some jackass will impose god on the conversation. Paul, you are this blog’s jackass. Congrats.

By: Paul

Paul — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 22:39:32 +0000

My worldview is that we’re very much out of wack because we’ve gotten far away from the things of God. I believe we’ve been seeing evidence of this for many years now. But it is a denial of what we as male and female were put on this earth for, which is to love each other. And because we were built differently, we ought to come back to our senses and live in harmony with our traditional roles. This perspective may be called sexist, but I know it to be the truth. True men desire dominance, and when a woman gives him this, she gets in return what her heart desires. Whatever is going on in the world that strays from this may work, but it won’t be love.

Women, do you really want the man to be a cream puff…honestly??
It is our responsibility to be the leader of our homes…but that doesn’t mean being an idiotic control freak quick to anger and abuse! It means being a humble GENTLE-MAN. It doesn’t mean that the woman can’t call any shots, but it means letting him lead and trusting that he’s making the right decisions for both.

It was once said by a conservative man, “You can have power, you can have love, but you can’t have both.”

By: Evaine

Evaine — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 14:42:40 +0000

Good post. You make some great points that most people do not fully understand.

“Now I can hear some women shout ‘about time’ I can hear you shout ‘we have a long way to go and it’s still a mans world’ and I can hear you shout ‘there are not enough women at the top of companies for it to be leaning toward a female society’. At the top of the tree, the statistics are grim with less than 1% of female chief executives in the UK with similar numbers in the US and the rest of Europe.”

I like how you explained that. Very helpful. Thanks.

By: cheap wow gold

cheap wow gold — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 06:34:39 +0000

However, your point about encouraging more males to take up teaching and companies to actively recruit women into executive roles is good. These very acts will help break the custom of oppressive gender roles.

By: Soumya

Soumya — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 11:05:39 +0000

I think the first thing you should be doing while writing such an article is defining exactly what you mean by masculine and feminine, and what exact characteristics or behaviour lead to ‘feminisation of men,’ so that there’s not much scope for misinterpretation of what you want to convey. Anyway, my two cents on what I understood from the article:

“That might sound ridiculous now but in 20 years time are we going to have young men who are more feminine and women who are more masculine. The line between feminine and masculine will become blurred.”

First of all, this is the very problem: defining men as the embodiment of that what are called ‘masculine’ qualities (strong, assertive, aggressive, analytical, home-builder, outspoken, leading, competitive, dominating, self-reliant, etc.), and women as that of ‘feminine’ qualities (gentle, sensitive, compassionate, nurturing, graceful, intuitive, homemaker, quiet, passive, cooperative,etc.). We may be born as male or female but not as masculine or feminine. If that wasn’t so, then ‘feminisation’ of men would not have been naturally possible in the first place. Masculine or feminine refer to a set of qualities which may be called X and Y for all we care! The very act of associating these words with a particular gender has created all the confusion.

Balance can only be created when both men and women develop both ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ qualities to a healthy extent.

By: Lucy Lastic

Lucy Lastic — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 00:46:48 +0000

I like my men ‘manly’ – I think most straight women do – and can see where you’re coming from. However, there were two periods during the last century (which isn’t really that long ago) when boys were brought up almost entirely by women because most of the men had left to fight a World War. As far as I know, this absence of male role models did not result in two generations of feminised men.

If men are any more feminine these days, I suspect that it’s down to more intrusive or accessible media communications, all trying to spread the word for a multitude of commercial reasons that what women really want is a ‘New Man’. On the other hand, perhaps men have always secretly hankered after an ironing board and a pair of rubber washing-up gloves. In which case, they can have mine, and I’ll get off down to the pub

By: Ansur

Ansur — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 07:56:02 +0000

I have seen a lot of the feminisation of men now not just in 20 years. We have epidemic of AD/HD not that it is not a trash can diagnosis but it is being noticed. There are many design differences between men and women hormonally so it wouldn’t surprise most that there are learning style differences. I being a male with ADD on the side of just being over alert have to deal with the distraction of information. As I got older and started studying things like anthropology I understood how to learn what to filter but there were no men who were really there who knew what I would mean when I would talk about not being able to shut the noise out.

Girls do not neurally have this tendency to scan the horizon as much it does not tend to be their learning style. I learned that I only tend to learn by solving problems that actually mean things similar to applied math, app chemistry, app physics, and computers as long as I could actually touch the problem in someway. Girls tend to get language quirks faster than men do so communication skills tend to be highly developed.

Naming a programming language that hasn’t changed in the last ten years is hard but there is one that I know of and it was written by a woman. COBOL Is this something that could mean that men really do not have a place in the manipulation of information and communication.

Also men have a higher statistical rate of mental illness than women, so having men that know how to deal with their mental capabilities and teaching boys how to deal with these differences effectively is something we desperately need. When my wife describes social order issues they make me laugh and when I try to describe to her why I know what is wrong with her when I say something literally does not smell right. That is something that I have noticed that most women tune out more that I can not so, I use it.

To smelling sick people and hearing when a light bulb is going to burn out.

Boys can tune it out so why not teach them to tune it in like symphony music. Sadly, the people who would teach that no longer apprentice.

just thoughts