The list of male privileges

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Originally Posted by Akashic_Librarian

Ok Aspiring, you make a good point, I gues the subject of gender is a little raw for most of us. Probably because we are so growth oriented, we all saw a piece of us we didn't like and that brought some emotions to the surface.

I admit it, I have a problem with women who attack men for the societal-paradigm we suffer. I don't have a problem with women, and I certainly don't think I am overall a better gender. BUT what I don't understand is why women want to be equal to men?

We emit copious bodily gases
We stink
We grow hair in unwanted places
We get beaten up in clubs for merely "looking"
We have one hell of a time trying to figure out what a women ment when she said *Insert non-descript, random phrase"

So your telling me yo uwant to be equal to THAT?

Nah...Instead of feminists trying to be equal to men, why not forge your own historic image, and leave ours alone.

I think that it's not so much a desire to be like men. That would be saying that man is the default and "best" gender and therefore we strive to achieve it. I just think that most women want to be seen as equal...not the same. I could be wrong

I think Joely makes a good point too. It's hard for any of us to know what to do in the current time where things are changing so rapidly. I've had some bad experiences in clubs and such where I did feel like I was a piece of meat or something, but I know that's not "all men everywhere." Still it made me more wary in clubs. And men have had the experience at my hands I am sure of being treated as a harasser in clubs due to my previous experiences.

Perhaps the only way to break these cycles is to take every person you meet as their own individual. However I do sometimes find this hard to do. And it would seem that some others do as well since we all got entrenched in our positions so quickly.

Maybe it's the collective pain-body of men and the collective pain-body of women. Certainly both genders have a history of fears, pains, joys, struggles, etc. Our personal pain-bodies are quite strong. How much more so a collective pain-body by gender going back to the beginning of time?! It starts to make sense why this discussion gets heated so quickly. Maybe?

[Joely]

Originally Posted by Akashic_Librarian

I admit it, I have a problem with women who attack men for the societal-paradigm we suffer. I don't have a problem with women, and I certainly don't think I am overall a better gender. BUT what I don't understand is why women want to be equal to men?

We emit copious bodily gases
We stink
We grow hair in unwanted places
We get beaten up in clubs for merely "looking"
We have one hell of a time trying to figure out what a women ment when she said *Insert non-descript, random phrase"

Ew! All women, of course, fart petunias and poo geraniums.

On a more serious note, I also have a problem with women who attack All Men because of the way society is at the moment. I think it's an ongoing, evolving process. Helped by lots of deodorant and razors, evidently.

[Rose of Cairo]

Gentlemen, Erki's question was clearly what the male privileges are, so we gave him a few. Nobody's denying that men also have gender specific problems or that women also have some privileges. This just wasn't the topic.

Looks like some of you guys get all emotional when it comes to this topic. Maybe it would be worthwhile for you to examine why?

Joely is right that focusing on such things isn't very empowering. However, Erki seems to have a particularly hard time with these questions and I wanted to help him understand the "other side"'s view.

Of course it would be more fun to just eliminate all gender specific privileges, no matter which gender is involved.

On a less serious side note, here another male privilege: when you're a man talking with someone, it's very unlikely that this person will talk with your breasts instead of with you.

Originally Posted by silicon toad2000

There is a skew of males at the top of the tree; there is also a skew of males at the bottom of the tree. There is a reason for this. The major intelligence gene is on the X chromosome. Women have two so their intelligence is an average of the two (no it’s not the sum of the two). Men only have one and so their intelligence level is dictated only by that one. Because of this, the range of intelligence is broader in males than in females. The lower percentile of males tend to be less intelligent than the lower percentile of females and the higher percentile of males tend to be more intelligent than the higher percentile of females. Jobs at each end of the spectrum tend to be filled by males.

You're assuming professional success is proportional to intelligence, which is not necessarily the case.

[Joely]

Originally Posted by Rose of Cairo

Gentlemen, Erki's question was clearly what the male privileges are, so we gave him a few. Nobody's denying that men also have gender specific problems or that women also have some privileges. This just wasn't the topic.

Looks like some of you guys get all emotional when it comes to this topic. Maybe it would be worthwhile for you to examine why?

Just to speak for the guys - perhaps it's because they feel attacked when they themselves are placed in a constantly difficult position socially with women. I have to admit, it must be really hard work knowing the right thing to say or do with women, when some of us are hardcore feminists and can't even stand to have a door opened for them without taking it as meaning they're a brainless object, and others are prepared to be treated in a manner that would make a doormat feel like royalty. It has to be incredibly confusing.

I've often felt that there's a tendency within the feminist movement to accuse men directly for things that are simply endemic in society at the moment, and obviously not their fault. And on top of that, the way women treat each other is horrifying - you only have to take any forum about parenting and start a thread about being a stay at home mom or a working mom and watch the fall-out from that. Women attack each other for their choices, judge each other, accuse each other in ways that men never do, and it runs much deeper.

On a less serious side note, here another male privilege: when you're a man talking with someone, it's very unlikely that this person will talk with your breasts instead of with you.

I hear you on that one.

[missing]

to aspiring_to_'clarity's posts;

Wouldn't it be fair to say that the reason that there are so many more men in military quarters is that it's been recent that women were allowed into the military at all. That has traditionally been a male field if there ever was one.

Maybe but why would anybody want to be in the military to begin with? Throughout history men have been endowed with the "privilege" of having to die in battle.

Also, if more men commit crimes there are more men in lockup. But maybe you are saying men are targeted or something. Please elaborate there. Is it similar to how there are a disproportionate number of minorities in prisons?

well more men seem to feel the need to commit crimes. That's what happens when you are desperate and have been rejected from society. You cease to care about it's well being and turn against it. My perception however is that the majority were first rejected by society before they became criminals. All that said, absurd things can get you put in jail, marijuana possession for example. Non payment of child support is another thing. People like to demonize "deadbeats" but in hard economic times sometimes even the most well meaning father is not going to be able to pay child support AND sustain himself. It seems to me rare that women are forced into jail for this kind of stuff.

That said these two weren't an interesting to me as the suicide rate being almost 6x as much for men as women ages 15-24. How does one account for that? (I have my ideas which I'll get to).

I don't suppose you know what it's like to be a woman in today's society either.

I don't which is why I haven't come out and said that one side flat out has it worse than the other. That said, I have a lot of problems that I think would be alleviated if I were female. Of course other things would pop up in its place. But I have no objective way to measure which would be more difficult, or which I would prefer.

That said it is my perception that women have a HUGE social/emotional advantage to men which is part social and part biological. I would use the fact that male suicide rates are so much higher as "evidence". I would imagine the reasons being that women usually have more support to fall back on when things get difficult. There is almost always a "female support" group somewhere but many don't even need it as they tend to form more emotional bonds with friends and family. In addition women tend to be more physically in touch with their emotions. Sure, they like to complain about how they have to deal with periods every month but the advantage is a connection to the natural world that men can only theorize about. Yes there is an advantage having the more dissociative perspective of a man; it can help you focus your mind better BUT it comes at a great cost, which is being out of touch with who you are deep down. I don't mean in shallow sociological terms but more natural or spiritual. This can lead to loneliness, depression and eventually suicide.

Aspiring, you say you are going to run off and cry, well many men (especially younger) are so over loaded with testosterone they couldn't cry if they wanted to! Of course most are socially trained not to cry pretty early in life.

It looks like we are all fighting about who has it the worst. I can't say that I don't see "male privilege" in the world. Does anyone agree that in the past we were much more like the societies of the Middle East? And that we have made a lot of headway into equality? I agree that things are better for women now than they have ever been (in many parts of the world). I think perhaps many men are afraid the tables will turn too far in the other direction. Of course that is not a fact, just my opinion.

Well personally I've never really bought into the idea that men have brutalized and oppressed women historically and our civility towards one another today is "progress". I find many people assume this point of view and expect others to as well, but few really sit down to examine it for themselves. Consider what I mentioned before about men being forced to go to war and die. Or even more recently, people talk a lot about the "oppressed" 1950's suburban house wife, the ones who spearheaded modern feminism. But did they really have it worse raising kids and keeping up a house, than a man did working a meaningless and maybe grueling factory job? Never mind that they were just fighting in the trenches of WW2.

If you want my honest opinion, and I am no history expert, it's that there have always been advantages and disadvantages to being male or female. I don't really see how things are so much more "equal" today. The only difference I see is that our lives are less brutal and less physical and thus our societal roles more out of touch with our bodies. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? I don't know, but I'm pretty sure it "is".

Basically, it's the historical assumption that women have always had it worse and we've been "progressing" ever since which I take issue with. One reason I get so defensive about this topic is that this unspoken assumption exists almost EVERYWHERE in our society. There is very little room to question it without being written off as a far right wacko. I find it very frustrating to not be able to speak my mind and be taken seriously or respected. Historical assumptions are a very dangerous thing.

I can't really comment much on the middle east comparison as I don't really know enough about how those societies work, though I imagine if female oppression exists anywhere today, that's the place. I doubt life is a picnic for most middle eastern men, however. Unless you are at the top of the food chain, as it normally works.

Maybe it's the collective pain-body of men and the collective pain-body of women. Certainly both genders have a history of fears, pains, joys, struggles, etc. Our personal pain-bodies are quite strong. How much more so a collective pain-body by gender going back to the beginning of time?! It starts to make sense why this discussion gets heated so quickly. Maybe?

Here is what I don't get. Why is the collective gendered pain body so much more powerful than the collective non-gendered body? Assuming you believe that we are all one collective consciousness. Our gender is just an illusion, yet Erin Pavlina thinks we should view our higher selves as a "he" or a "she". Why are we so connected to this temporary, physical manifestation of ourselves?

Perhaps the only way to break these cycles is to take every person you meet as their own individual. However I do sometimes find this hard to do. And it would seem that some others do as well since we all got entrenched in our positions so quickly.

This is a good point and I agree with it completely.

[missing]

Originally Posted by Rose of Cairo

Gentlemen, Erki's question was clearly what the male privileges are, so we gave him a few. Nobody's denying that men also have gender specific problems or that women also have some privileges. This just wasn't the topic.

Looks like some of you guys get all emotional when it comes to this topic. Maybe it would be worthwhile for you to examine why?

I don't think it's really a mystery why, for me anyway. See my post to "aspiring to clarity" and what I wrote about historical assumptions. I went to the most liberal school in America (well we're at least in the top 10). I live in the most liberal city in America. I relate far more towards liberal people than conservatives (if I ever relate to anybody). So in short I'm surrounded by people who take the "white men are privileged" assumption as a kind of dogma. Disagree and you won't merely be debated you will be ostracized. I guess somebody could tell me to move somewhere else but I like living where I do and am not going to leave over some intellectual disagreement. I have to bite my tongue a lot in "real" life so the internet becomes an outlet and thus sometimes a lot of repressed emotion comes through.

I was kind of dreading the response to my earlier threads but it wasn't too bad. People here do seem more open minded than on many other message boards. I shouldn't be surprised.

On a less serious side note, here another male privilege: when you're a man talking with someone, it's very unlikely that this person will talk with your breasts instead of with you.

i'm pretty sure a women's breast is part of "her" and not a seperate entity. So he's still talking to "you" just a limited part. ;p

and responding to Joely.

Just to speak for the guys - perhaps it's because they feel attacked when they themselves are placed in a constantly difficult position socially with women. I have to admit, it must be really hard work knowing the right thing to say or do with women, when some of us are hardcore feminists and can't even stand to have a door opened for them without taking it as meaning they're a brainless object, and others are prepared to be treated in a manner that would make a doormat feel like royalty. It has to be incredibly confusing.

to take this a step further, this is why many guys won't even try to get into a relationship with a woman. There is too much risk, from the emotional pangs of rejection to even legal issues in some cases. Sure women complain about being harassed but the upside is that it's rare to see a woman of average attractiveness go too long between relationships (if she choses). She doesn't have to do any work or take any risks and she can still become involved with someone. Men on the other hand will go years between relationships cause they can't approach a woman, for whatever reason. Incidentally, gay men do not have this problem.

[Rose of Cairo]

Originally Posted by Joely

Just to speak for the guys - perhaps it's because they feel attacked when they themselves are placed in a constantly difficult position socially with women. I have to admit, it must be really hard work knowing the right thing to say or do with women, when some of us are hardcore feminists and can't even stand to have a door opened for them without taking it as meaning they're a brainless object, and others are prepared to be treated in a manner that would make a doormat feel like royalty. It has to be incredibly confusing.

Yes of course, I totally understand that.

(Although they wouldn't have this problem if they just genuinely were who they are instead of trying to do the "right thing" to please us)

I've often felt that there's a tendency within the feminist movement to accuse men directly for things that are simply endemic in society at the moment, and obviously not their fault.

I don't know much about the feminist movement and don't see myself as a part of any movement. Can't speak for other women, but I for my part am not accusing anybody. I think it's nobody's "fault", it's not about fault anyway. IMO women are responsible for this situation just as much as men are. It takes two to tango For example it's enough to look at how mothers raise their kids to see that many of them still teach them sexist stereotypes.

All that is not a reason not to say what IS. In my opinion at least, sexism IS. In both ways of course, and I dislike it in both cases. Here in this thread we're examining only one side of it though, sorry.

For example, here in Europe at least a male politician is very unlikely to be judged on how he looks, whereas journalists often make comments about the looks of female candidates, what they wear, how good looking they are, and so on. Their appearance is kinda an argument for or against them, although it has absolutely nothing to do with their leadership skills. I've never heard a journalist make a comment about how attractive a male politician is. As long as he has a correct outfit, who cares about the form of his nose. Only politics count.

You'll say all this is anecdotal, but that's exactly how it works. It's all about probabilities, statistics, averages, tendencies. It's some kind of unseizable pressure.

Men suffer from the same kind of pressure, just about other things. Why don't we just let go of all that?

And on top of that, the way women treat each other is horrifying - you only have to take any forum about parenting and start a thread about being a stay at home mom or a working mom and watch the fall-out from that. Women attack each other for their choices, judge each other, accuse each other in ways that men never do, and it runs much deeper.

Hmm... Well, I can't say anything about that - this is not what I experience in my life at all.

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Missing, I wonder what you say to the fact that women have historically been denied the right to vote, denied the right to hold property, were not considered heirs (only the male could inherit), were traded from father to husband as property with not much say of their own, not educated in the same way as men and could not hold jobs outside the home? It's not that men had no problems of their own during this time, only that women had no autonomy to decide for themselves what they would do. They were at the effect of men in all areas of their lives.

Of course men were not living a fantasy during those times. They had and continue to have their own issues to deal with which I can imagine are very hard as well. But can you really say that women have been considered equal by men throughout history? I don't see how you can say that's so when men were in charge and made all the decisions. Who was it that forced these men to war? That is something I wonder about. Someone decided a war was necessary. And I would imagine it was a man since men have historically held positions of power.

Still, I can see where you are coming from in saying the rates of suicide worry you. I agree that society places men in a tough spot when it comes to emotional well-being. Part of the problem I see which perpetuates all of the problems we are talking about on both sides is in fact viewing the genders as so distinct and separate. Men are often taught to hold in their emotions, perhaps that they shouldn't even have them, but certainly that they should be able to control them. Women have much more freedom in the area of showing emotions and seeking help to deal with them. However, we are also belittled and called crazy sometimes for showing our emotions. But probably that has something to do with men being taught it's bad or unstable to do so.

I hope to raise my children not to believe in the stereotypes that are prevalent in society. But I do see them perpetuated in many families. I don't think either gender has it so easy now that we are talking about it. In my own life I've seen some things in the men I know that have shown me as much. In individuals who will be open to you it's easier to see and understand. I hope we can all try to understand each other and stop taking sides in defense. I don't want for anyone to feel marginalized or oppressed.

[Marco Polo]

Originally Posted by {aspiring_to_clarity}

So I guess it's a matter of degrees. Everyone should just accept whatever is happening since it's not as bad as the Middle East? Do you consider me a Feminazi? Just curious...

A matter of degrees, exactly. Do you rush to the hospital with a scratch, in the same way you'd rush with a cracked skull? Not if you're normal, right?

But looking at contemporary feminism, women's study classes etc etc, you'd guess we were still firmly in the dark ages. The focus on the issue is unproportional to actual inequalities. That being said, there is no reason to accept injustices, wherever we may find them.

And no, you're not a Feminazi in my books.

Originally Posted by {aspiring_to_clarity}

I am not talking about "woe is me I feel undervalued" I am talking about the value society places on men and women.

Value is a tricky word. To move heavy boxes I'd put more value on a guy. When something involves multitasking, perhaps I'd put more on a female.

On the whole, though, people are judged by competence, not gender -- unless I'm living in some fluffy world completely alien to you. But the subjective feeling of being undervalued, now that's something different.

[Erki]

Originally Posted by {aspiring_to_clarity}

Who was it that forced these men to war? That is something I wonder about. Someone decided a war was necessary. And I would imagine it was a man since men have historically held positions of power.

I've read that during one of the world wars, women were encouraged to urge men to go to war. They would have to belittle and humiliate them if they didn't.

It's almost always that a man would have to die for a woman. It's just chivalry, nothing less, nothing more. A woman's life seems to be valued more - "even women and children were killed" - if a man is killed then it's no big deal.

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Women and children are usually civilians. But I disagree that if a man is killed it's no big deal. I haven't heard anyone espouse that belief.

I have not heard about women being encouraged to urge men to go to war. Where is that information from? I'd like to hear more about that.

In addition, I don't believe anyone should have to die for anyone else. But I would die for anyone of my friends or family if it could save their lives. I know plenty of women who would. Men are not forced to go to war to die for women. If anything they are protecting the society that they live in (still I disagree war is the answer, but following that line of thought)...not just women! I believe all military enlistment should be a choice. Plenty of people chose to join the armed forces knowing what that entails. I don't agree with drafting. If everyone is in the armed forces out of free will we will have a military comprised of the people who feel it's right and honorable to fight and possibly die for their country, would we not?

I still wonder who it is that is deciding to go to war. You said that the women were to urge men to go, but who decided to start the war in the first place? Are you saying that women started the world war and made men go fight it for them? I guess encouraging men to go to the fight was "doing their part for their country" since they were not considered capable of serving. The leaders who chose to engage in the wars were men. The people deemed able to engage in combat were men. When women were given the option to join, many did. That they were prohibited from doing so previously was a decision made by men.

[Erki]

Originally Posted by {aspiring_to_clarity}

Women and children are usually civilians.

There are plenty of male civilians as well. And this applies to other acts of violence too, not just wars.

[Marco Polo]

All this assuming that wars are inherently bad.

Question is, if it weren't for the combatant instinct (predomninant in males), would we be here today?

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Originally Posted by Erki

There are plenty of male civilians as well. And this applies to other acts of violence too, not just wars.

Oh, I thought we were talking about war. But of course there are male civilians. And I am just as sad if a male civilian gets killed as a female. I am probably more sad when it's a child, but that is a different story. In what ways do you see men being less "missed" when they are killed? Is it common to you to see no one care about the death of a male civilian or of a man killed by another act of violence?

Are men who are killed by other acts of violence not mourned as much as women? I don't find that to be true. Also, are men more often the victims of violence? When women are victims of violence, is it more likely at the hands of other women or of men? Are men more likely to be victimized by other men or by women?

These questions may not be pertinent at all.

[Erki]

Originally Posted by Marco Polo

All this assuming that wars are inherently bad.

Question is, if it weren't for the combatant instinct (predomninant in males), would we be here today?

Paradise?

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Originally Posted by Marco Polo

All this assuming that wars are inherently bad.

Question is, if it weren't for the combatant instinct (predomninant in males), would we be here today?

I see you agree that the instinct for war is a male trait more than a female one? This is what I was trying to get at before when Erki said men had to go to war and die for women. Who was it that came up with war in the first place? I feel like it was men, and I am very sorry if that sounds incredibly misandrous. I don't mean it to, but men do seem to be the more aggressive ones. I can't say with any certainty which came first: male aggression leading to war or societal suppression of men's emotions leading to rage played out in war. However war seems to have been around since "the beginning of time" and it was men carrying it out, correct?

I don't think war is necessary. I see no benefit from the nationalism and imperialism that leads to war. Where would we be today if we all shared the world without resorting to violence to resolve our differences? I believe in a much better place.

[oberlee]

Originally Posted by Erki

Thinking here, I can't think of one thing that men can do but women can't. Plenty of things to where the vice versa applies, though.

I can't, as a woman, become a Catholic priest.

[Erki]

Ultimately we all know that this thread is futile since it's obvious that the world would be a better place without men. Because lets face it - all bad things done in history have been done by men. And all bad things that will be done in future will be done by men as well. Mark my words.