Men Inequality: are men falling behind in society?

aeon said:
You don’t know what gender is, do you?
Click to expand...

The meaning of the word gender has changed in the eyes of society in the last couple of decades.
Not the actual definition, but its word usage.

"Grammatical gender is only very loosely associated with distinctions of sex."

This differentiation wasn't so critical in the eyes of most, decades ago.
Now it has become weaponized.
 
Wyote said:
The meaning of the word gender has changed in the eyes of society in the last couple of decades.
Not the actual definition, but its word usage.

"Grammatical gender is only very loosely associated with distinctions of sex."

This differentiation wasn't so critical in the eyes of most, decades ago.
Now it has become weaponized.
Click to expand...

It’s all I have ever known, beginning with being taught about Christine Jorgensen as a young child, which was 20 years after she went public about being trans, now 70 years ago.

I agree it has been weaponized, for...reasons.

As a language descriptivist, I realize 70 years is both a long time, and nothing at all.

I understand sex to be a function of biology, as expressed through chromosomes, and dimorphic sex characteristics, which is to say, male, female, intersex, and otherwise.

I understand gender to be a social construct which varies between and among the cultures of the world, throughout history, as evidenced by the assigned gender roles of those cultures.

For me, those words have never meant the same thing, and are not interchangeable.

I blame my mother. :P

Cheers,
Ian
 
aeon said:
You don’t know what gender is, do you?

It sounds like you are talking about dimorphic sex.

Cheers,
Ian
Click to expand...

Noah Webster
Gender


GEN'DER, noun [Latin genus, from geno, gigno; Gr.to beget, or to be born; Eng. kind. Gr. a woman, a wife; Sans. gena, a wife, and genaga, a father. We have begin from the same root. See Begin and Can.]

1. Properly, kind; sort.

2. A sex, male or female. Hence,

3. In grammar, a difference in words to express distinction of sex; usually a difference of termination in nouns, adjectives and participles, to express the distinction of male and female. But although this was the original design of different terminations, yet in the progress of language, other words having no relation to one sex or the other, came to have genders assigned them by custom. Words expressing males are said to be of the masculine gender; those expressing females, of the feminine gender; and in some languages, words expressing things having no sex, are of the neuter or neither gender

GEN'DER, verb transitive To beget; but engender is more generally used.

GEN'DER, verb intransitive To copulate; to breed. Leviticus 19:19.



I have watched words be redefined.
 
just me said:
GEN'DER, noun [Latin genus, from geno, gigno; Gr.to beget, or to be born; Eng. kind. Gr. a woman, a wife; Sans. gena, a wife, and genaga, a father. We have begin from the same root. See Begin and Can.]
Click to expand...

Yes, and this is perhaps the first violation of boundaries, and the first act without consent. But to understand that, and how we have arrived where we are today, learning the history is important. The language, the witness, and the narrative.

In the past, we did not know—and we did not allow—other than the binary, for reasons pragmatic and otherwise. Society addressed human truths in many different ways, some celebrant, some shameful, and some brutal.

And just as cultures, and societies, evolve and change, so does language. The descriptivists and the prescriptivists manage to find balance such that there is both context and the vibrancy of a fertile, living thing process.

In the link you provided, these ideas are key:

just me said:
in the progress of language, other words having no relation to one sex or the other, came to have genders assigned them by custom.
Click to expand...

As in, e.g., French.

just me said:
Words expressing males are said to be of the masculine gender; those expressing females, of the feminine gender; and in some languages, words expressing things having no sex, are of the neuter or neither gender
Click to expand...

And so these are choices, assigned, and not inherent qualities.

So it goes with human beings.

A child may be born with XY chromosomes, and the physiological presence of a penis, and from this, we say the child’s sex is male.

But the label “boy” is a cultural construct. It exists in many cultures, and what that label means differs among them. It would be wrong to say those meanings are arbitrary, but it is important to realize that those meanings are assigned from without, and are not inherent qualities.

This is the same with XX chromosomes, vulvas, and the word “girl.”

I would suggest it to be a better way to allow the child to choose for themselves, if and when they wanted to choose.

That said, please understand I am a radical as it concerns children. I wish for children to be considered as people, not property. I wish for greater recognition of agency and autonomy on the part of the child—with associated honoring of consent—for genital integrity, witness of a broader and deeper appreciation of individuality, and the end of the assignment of narrow and rigid gender roles which deny each and every child’s chance to realize the human potential that is their birthright.

-------

I welcome a future where awareness and language have expanded and grown to more fully appreciate, and describe, the human experience. For those who believe in God, to better behold, accept, and celebrate the wonder that is creation. As is often said, God does not make mistakes. Agnostics like me will tag along. The secular will find secular reasons.

We are willfully ignorant of those parts of the human existence which are of tremendous power. There is no need for this. Greater self-awareness, emotional acceptance and awareness, and understanding of identity, attraction, and sexuality would all contribute to the meeting of human need, more nourishing and satisfying relationships, improved mental health, and the ability to both express and receive love—not as we are told—but in accordance with the authenticity of who we are as human beings.

Best,
Ian
 
just me said:
I have learned what people do not want to accept, they change for their own convenience.
Click to expand...

Some changed language not for convenience, but because they needed better language to describe the acceptance and love they offered themselves when no one else would.

Some did not, and do not, accept this, and so they change laws and the game because they do not accept the world, and the people in it, as they are. Instead, they work to enforce their idea of how the world, and the people in it, should be, onto others.

Perhaps they believe they know the will of God. I can’t say for sure, because I’m unsure about the existence of God—I allow for it, but I don’t think I could know for sure one way or the other.

That said, I’ve read the Gospels, and I’m not sure how the devout who do not accept reconcile that with Matthew 22: 35-40.

Or perhaps they believe God makes mistakes, and are in possession of the discernment and prudence to ascertain his earthly missteps.

Cheers,
Ian
 
Perhaps I am happy with the words I chose to use. Satya and I spent many hours back and forth, and those words are most likely saved somewhere. I have no need to go through it again with you or anyone else. While many seek change, I seek spiritual things. I happen to see many of society's changes as self-edification for the few.

What is education, without using speeches and search engines, to each of us? They use calculators and search engines at schools now. I was taught "how to think for myself". I was taught how to figure things out, and how to check the answer, without using a calculator. I am thankful for this. I was taught to question things. I had some of the best teachers ever, and have never liked being dictated to how or what I should think. When my intuitive mind questioned something and could not accept it, there were reasons. I listened to the sacred gift. Still do. My spirit embraced what I knew to be real. It still does. I thank God for who I am and how I am, without any pride for something I was born with. Gifted with.

Matthew 22:35-40
King James Version

35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying,

36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is the first and great commandment.

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. editing

I personally embrace this answer as my own answer. Loving God is rewarding to my spirit in ineffable ways.

Loving my neighbor as myself was difficult for me early on. I loved them more than I loved myself.
Loving God helped me learn to love myself. God helped me learn how to love myself. I cannot help but to share these things.
 
Last edited:
Rather surprising contrast between the shit hole that is the US and a lot of the west in general vs Japan when it comes to issues such as this.


Modern society is a wood chipper

 
iu


Women are more likely than men to be clinically depressed, while autism is disproportionately a disorder of males.
Women process pain signals in the parts of their brains that handle emotion, while men shuttle these same messages to the more analytical regions.
Women excel at fine motor tasks like putting pegs in small holes, while men are hard to beat at target-directed activities likes darts and archery.
Despite the anatomical differences in math-linked brain regions, women are better at straight-forward arithmetic (adding, subtracting, and so forth); men are better at reasoning their way through a math problem.

Individual brain structures differ not only in rates of development but in their overall size relative to the rest of the brain---and they do so in ways that provoke all manner of hot political debate. Two of the key language centers are larger in women than in men, for instance, which seems to confirm the general belief that girls are better linguists than boys. Similarly, a brain section linked to mental-arithmetic abilities is larger in men than in women, which, like it or not, offers some anatomical support for the idea that boys are better in math. In 1991 the prosaically named third interstitial nucleus of the anterior hypothalamus became the world's most famous neuron clump when neuroscientist Simon LeVay showed that it is half as big
in women and homosexual men as it is in heterosexual men.

Differences in brain structure and the traits they confer never fall neatly into silos---boys have this and girls do that categories that would explain everything as a simple matter of cerebral architecture. Just as gender doesn't define who you are, neither does it define what your brain is or what you as an individual are capable of learning or doing.

Brain size should not be interpreted as implying any sort of functional advantage or disadvantage. Most scientists agree that the gap in manual dexterity between the genders has some in utero roots, but they hasten to add that later training amplifies the disparity, as more girls are taught to sew and more boys to shoot guns.

If the talents and aptitudes of the genders overlap, however, that's surely not how we start out. There is evidence that the brains of male and female fetuses begin diverging even before genitals develop and hormones start pumping.

The age at which girl's brains reach peak volume is 10 1/2 years old; males, 14 1/2 years old.

quoted, Lori Oliwenstein, TIME, Your Brain: A User's Guide

I'll try to copy more later.
 
It saddens me to notice that even infjs community is succumbing to gender ideology.

Anyway... the opening question is misleading. Men cannot fall behind the society because they make up half of it. If their objective performance is declining, it means the society itself is declining. It's analogous to the question - can I outrun my lower half of the body in a race? And the obvious answer is no.

I see it only a matter of time of when women will start dropping from workforce and higher education too. Currently they are sort of compensating for the other sex, but it won't last. Then the societal decline will accelerate: we will have crumbling infrastructure, broken supply chains, disintegrating economy and social security, rocketing crime, decreasing health and quality of life. If you look closely - all of it had already started and is going on for some time.

The ideologues who wish to demolish existing "oppressing" structures have nothing to replace them with. They are engaged in magical thinking that once the revolution is over, a new and superior society will just come out of nowhere. Like that had ever happened :) What will happen instead is that we will go back to dark ages and it's going to be nasty for some time.

I also do not see any practical way of reversing this trend, so it seems that we will have to live through it and bear the consequences. Hopefully emerging better on the other end.
 
Tamagochi said:
It saddens me to notice that even infjs community is succumbing to gender ideology.

Anyway... the opening question is misleading. Men cannot fall behind the society because they make up half of it. If their objective performance is declining, it means the society itself is declining. It's analogous to the question - can I outrun my lower half of the body in a race? And the obvious answer is no.

I see it only a matter of time of when women will start dropping from workforce and higher education too. Currently they are sort of compensating for the other sex, but it won't last. Then the societal decline will accelerate: we will have crumbling infrastructure, broken supply chains, disintegrating economy and social security, rocketing crime, decreasing health and quality of life. If you look closely - all of it had already started and is going on for some time.

The ideologues who wish to demolish existing "oppressing" structures have nothing to replace them with. They are engaged in magical thinking that once the revolution is over, a new and superior society will just come out of nowhere. Like that had ever happened :) What will happen instead is that we will go back to dark ages and it's going to be nasty for some time.

I also do not see any practical way of reversing this trend, so it seems that we will have to live through it and bear the consequences. Hopefully emerging better on the other end.
Click to expand...

"The poorer the society, the more people assume their natural gender roles. Wokeism only thrives when life becomes too comfortable" - Andrew Tate
 
Tamagochi said:
It saddens me to notice that even infjs community is succumbing to gender ideology.

Anyway... the opening question is misleading. Men cannot fall behind the society because they make up half of it. If their objective performance is declining, it means the society itself is declining. It's analogous to the question - can I outrun my lower half of the body in a race? And the obvious answer is no.

I see it only a matter of time of when women will start dropping from workforce and higher education too. Currently they are sort of compensating for the other sex, but it won't last. Then the societal decline will accelerate: we will have crumbling infrastructure, broken supply chains, disintegrating economy and social security, rocketing crime, decreasing health and quality of life. If you look closely - all of it had already started and is going on for some time.

The ideologues who wish to demolish existing "oppressing" structures have nothing to replace them with. They are engaged in magical thinking that once the revolution is over, a new and superior society will just come out of nowhere. Like that had ever happened :) What will happen instead is that we will go back to dark ages and it's going to be nasty for some time.

I also do not see any practical way of reversing this trend, so it seems that we will have to live through it and bear the consequences. Hopefully emerging better on the other end.
Click to expand...

It is unavoidable in the trash heap that is western society that is so hell bent on suicide be it through ideology and so much else.
 
Tamagochi said:
The ideologues who wish to demolish existing "oppressing" structures have nothing to replace them with. They are engaged in magical thinking that once the revolution is over, a new and superior society will just come out of nowhere.
Click to expand...

This is the important bit.
I think the assumption in most people's minds is that whoever agrees with them, their in-group, contains inherently better and more capable people.
Which is kinda laughable tbh. Rome wasn't built in a day, as they say.

I don't agree with the doom and gloom assessment, but it's definitely a downward trend for a while which has already been going on as you said.
 
Wyote said:
I don't agree with the doom and gloom assessment, but it's definitely a downward trend for a while which has already been going on as you said.
Click to expand...

copywritten and wrote 35 to 40 years ago
"The Road of Pain"

I've walked along the road of pain
Each time I step, the more I gain
I learn more with each step I take
My mind has taken in the wake

The shadows from the trees of doom
Block out the light, I walk in gloom
I look around and no one's there
Yet, all the voices I can hear

Despondency now rules the road
It seems that pain is my abode
I walk alone, although I feel
So many others at my heal

My hands now grab the road of pain
My knees enlist the pale terrain
The more I hurt, the more I crawl
The tears I held back start to fall

And now I fall upon my face
I cry aloud in my disgrace
Oh Lord, please help me stand upright
For I have tried with all my might

Please take away this road of pain
Please send to us the latter rain
For I returned unto the dirt
My pride is gone, my feelings hurt

I know I'm dirty in your eyes
My youthful sins I now despise
Believe me, Lord, I'd rather die
Than look at You and live a lie

Take me away, that they might live
Show them the mercy that You give
The road of pain and I are one
I've fallen and I will not run

What is it that You ask of me
Open my eyes that I might see
I'm rising up above the pain
Yet many millions still remain

So now I see, they live in gloom
Surrounded by the trees of doom
I must go back, I cannot leave
Don't take me Lord, I feel bereaved

I love those on the road of pain
And if I have to, I'll remain
I know you love me, I'm your son
I know I'm not the only one

So please forgive them, they can't see
And if you hurt them, please hurt me
I love those on the road of pain
I pray Your mercy they will gain jm
 
Last edited:
just me said:
copywritten and wrote 45 years ago

I've walked along the road of pain
Each time I step, the more I gain
I learn more with each step I take
My mind has taken in the wake

The shadows from the trees of doom
Block out the light, I walk in doom
I look around and no one's there
Yet, all the voices I can hear

I walk alone, although I feel
So many others at my heal

My hands now grab the road of pain
My knees enlist the pale terrain
The more I walk, the more I hurt


Oh Lord, please help me stand upright
For I have tried with all my might
Please take away this road of pain
Please send to us the latter rain

For I returned unto the dirt
My pride is gone, my feelings hurt
I know I'm dirty in your eyes
My youthful sins I now despise

The road of pain and I are one
I've fallen and I cannot run
What is it that you ask of me
Open my eyes that I might see ...to be continued

So now I see, they live in gloom
Surrounded by the trees of doom
I must go back, I cannot leave
Don't take me Lord, I feel bereaved

I love those on the road of pain
And if I have to, I'll remain
I know you love me, I'm your son
I know I'm not the only one

So please forgive them, they can't see
And if you hurt them, please hurt me
Open their eyes, that they might see... to be cont'd
Click to expand...

Not sure of your intent and meaning in sharing this, but it's objectively good.
Very relatable in a humanistic way.
 
Anemoia said:
The 'solution' for men is thereby a counterintuitive one: men cannot compete in this 'protect me by...' game, but must unfortunately instead confirm to their own fundamental biological imperative that is imposed on them - service and sacrifice.

They must begin to play this game: 'help me better serve and sacrifice by...'. Only there will society consider returning any privileges to them, as this was always the social compact between the sexes. Men said 'I need this authority to serve and protect women', and it was granted to them on those grounds only; it was not granted to them by means of might, 'power' or 'oppression'.
Click to expand...

An interesting take but it's only half of the equation. The other half is: what do women bring to the table?

The social contract over thousands of years was: women provide babies, men provide resources and security. However lately this has changed. There is no longer an expectation for women to have children. In fact, it is being actively discouraged as a detriment for her health and career. It goes as far as: we have too many people on the planet, there's not enough resources, climate change, yada yada, blah blah.

Given that women no longer want to provide their end of the contract and are actively taking over responsibilities from men, the response from latter is: more power to you while we're gonna enjoy the easy life for once. There is zero incentive for him give up his space on a lifeboat to a childless career feminist. It will take some time till women figure out that they have been scammed: they are now doing the hard work of men without any added benefits and in expense of their own biological imperative. It's not fun to spend 40 years at a corporation doing meaningless jobs only to end up alone in the end.

Meanwhile that "easy life" for men is not going that well also. For it's lonely and aimless. At least there's an endless supply of porn and video games to console.
Eventually one of the following will happen to end the crisis:
  1. A new social contract will be created complementing both sexes and we will have a new golden age. Very unlikely.
  2. Women will reject feminism and go back to previous contract. Also very unlikely.
  3. There will be a decline of things until a breaking point. When there will be genuine threats and scarce resources, sex roles will revert to default. Medium to high probability.
  4. Someone will make an irresistible offer to those men: join my gang / army / religion / revolution and you will be whole again. Violence on a mass scale will follow and minorities are the most likely target. Sex roles will revert to default. High probability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top