Feminism, and Masculinity: How to have a more useful conversation.

[Richard]

I have no problem with that,just as long as you remember your words here when it applies to other posters threads and you start with the whole name calling and discrediting through intimidation.

Otherwise it appears as a,do what I say and not what I do scenario.

Fair enough?

[Richard]

I'm ok with points of view on this topic ranging from interviews of pimps, to Bible thumpers, to promoters of misandry to gay and other voices offering unique insights. Anecdotes are great too.

_____________________

I'm want to touch on one incident that has bothered me. Scandinavia includes countries leading the way in offering economic and social equality for women to the point of requiring set percentages of women on boards and in governments. The assumption is that women are equal to the point that divorces are usually simple matters equally splitting property and parenting time 50/50 without any alimony. The thought regarding alimony might be that if women have the same educational opportunities in e.g. Norway as men, why then should there still be alimony; a throwback an era when women didn't have abortion services and job opportunities.

The incident I wanted to mention was the sinking of the Estonia. Most of the passengers were Swedish. The crew was Estonian."When the Estonia passenger ferry headed from Tallinn to Stockholm suddenly sank in the middle of the icy Baltic sea in 1994, 852 of the 989 people onboard perished, with only 5.4 percent of women surviving, compared to 22 percent for men."

The Swedish authors of this study suggest that was the norm, that mostly male crew members always have a survival edge, but even their own statistics show the ratio was twice the statistical male advantage rate as was the norm. I remember accounts at the time remarking on how men showed no chivalry. Gone was the precept of women and children first. It was 'every man for himself' and women didn't do nearly as well. If there is a relationship between sexual equality movement in the west and the loss of chivalry, I don't have enough information to say there is, it is not generally discussed as offsetting the many benefits of social and economic opportunities to women.

Interesting enough the Girl Scouts have issued a warning to parents about having their child hugging relatives when greeting them.

https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/the...yre-wrong.html

That's an opinion but there are other sources out there.

But yet in many cultures a hug and kiss on the cheek is an acceptable from of greeting just like in the past where we greeted with a handshake.

With men you were judged on a firm and strong handshake where as with women more so just a lite shake.

So were we taught that women were the weaker sex and should be treated differently then their male counter parts?

Laws and morals were geared towards that,bluntly you could punch a man but never even think about hitting a woman,it just was not done.

There are distinct differences between males and females,if the goal is to remove those differences, so everybody is equal,then you would have to remove everything gender related out of the equation.

In the example of Estonia it would have never been mentioned the differences,it would have just been reported as 852 perished as the distinction between the sexes would not exist.

But it goes back to what I was already chastised for posting,in order to create equality,you have to remove individualism and treat everybody on a set rule base.

Which in itself creates problems,if a woman likes to be treated like a woman,is it disrespectful to actually do that,one may find it as a sign of disrespect where another may not.

I know women that enjoy being able to stay home to raise the children,which used to be the norm,but yet they get guff from counter parts and are viewed as weak by not standing up for themselves and entering the workforce.

Outside of equality in the workforce etc. unless you can actually clone everybody as a robot in order to remove the personal aspect out of it,you have to remove the human aspect out of the equation.

But you do see the push to remove the gender aspect out of the equation,if I am not mistaken Sweden is also pushing the removal of a gender being placed on a birth certificate until the person decides what gender they wish to be.

Which kinda defeats the whole purpose of being gender neutral,the end result is what we are seeing now,I want to be treated like a man but still be a woman and retain certain aspects of that,I do not think it is really a card that can be pulled out when convenient.

Maybe that is why in Japan the push is in creating synthetic partners where emotions are removed,both male and female.

[bust]

I said STOP!

That applies to both of you!

This back and forth has nothing to do with the thread in any way shape or form!

It makes the entire forum a waste!

On topic of Get the F off my thread!

I'll agree with Richard on this: it's funny you say that when on another thread you took it so far off topic you bragged your insults are the best.

We all make mistakes.

It's usually good advice: take a deep breath; exhale slowly. Another...

We all can learn.

[Canadian Visitor]

I'll agree with Richard on this: it's funny you say that when on another thread you took it so far off topic you bragged your insults are the best.

We all make mistakes.

It's usually good advice: take a deep breath; exhale slowly. Another...

We all can learn.

I agree I went off track in that other thread. Though I wasn't arguing with myself.

I was the only one to apologize for participating.

I also took the route first of reporting posts.

Unfortunately, in my opinion, Lowell maintains a very low level of moderation here.

But it is his board.

I did lose my patience, completely.

And to avoid the risk of that happening again.

I would like people to stop running subjects completely off the rails.

I don't care what anyone's line of employment is or was.

I don't care what anyone's academic credentials are, unless its pertinent to their argument.

I don't care whether I find someone likeable or whether they like me.

All other things being equal its nice to be liked, but not essential.

What is essential to me is that this forum fulfill the purpose one.

Intelligent discussion and exchange of ideas.

The nature of those are determined by the subject of the thread.

I take serious issue what some pass-off as on-topic around here that would get moderated out almost anywhere else.

Be that as it may, I'll make an effort to shut my trap on that, IF I can see someone is trying to be on topic.

But when its degenerating into a pissing contest, we all know exactly where it goes.

At best its a waste. At worst, Lowell will lock the thread, or even suspend users.

Can we actually try to discuss the damned subject now, PLEASE!

[Jimaz]

When our sandcastles keep getting stomped, we're not using enough nails.

[Pam]

Unfortunately, in my opinion, Lowell maintains a very low level of moderation here.

If you want a moderator to step in, you have to report the post. They don't read every post on every thread.

[Canadian Visitor]

If you want a moderator to step in, you have to report the post. They don't read every post on every thread.

I have. So have others.

There is clearly a laissez-faire doctrine here of intervening in only the most extreme cases.

Unfortunately that ruins a lot of threads around here.

It wouldn't take a great deal of effort to clean it up.

Suspend or ban the two or three worst offenders and everyone would come into line.

[jcole]

I have. So have others.

There is clearly a laissez-faire doctrine here of intervening in only the most extreme cases.

Unfortunately that ruins a lot of threads around here.

It wouldn't take a great deal of effort to clean it up.

Suspend or ban the two or three worst offenders and everyone would come into line.

99.9% of the time I agree with you but IIRC, Lowell's goal in creating non-Detroit was to allow some leeway in getting a little feisty. I also agree with you that it can get so far off track that you are riding an entirely different train, if not switching to an airplane. I think his original intent was to let these threads police themselves, but recently it's gotten so bad he finally had to step in.

[Richard]

It’s kinda like a fly complaining about other fly’s buzzing about.

[Lowell]

Okay.... I've been getting some complaints [On Non-Detroit, almost never on Discuss Detroit] so here's something I wrote in reply to one.

Non-Detroit was created to essentially say, “Argue politics all you like here, just keep it off Discuss Detroit and if you start one there we’re moving here.” It is a steam valve.

Members mix it up more over here due the nature of topics and more slack is allowed. Even then, direct name-calling or personal physical threats are not allowed. And civil behavior is always encouraged.

One needs to also understand that we do not have time or the unpleasant desire to intervene. In spite of flare ups almost all threads are self-healing, the tit for tats fade, and the discussions rolls on.

Our best advice is to rise above, and do not respond to posts that upset and never get personal. That only adds to the flames and spreads the fire. One also has to option to block posts by members who aggravate them.

Be like, say, oladub. Make your points in an informative manner and avoid the personal. Especially, resist the urge to hit back. Thank you.

[Honky Tonk]

Feminism, and Masculinity: How to have a more useful conversation.


"Honey, get me a beer!"

[coracle]

So now we know “How To Have A More Useful Conversation”, CV style, Eh?

It is HIS Thread damn it! Eh?

[Zacha341]

Or conversely:

"Honey, take out the trash, would you!"

Feminism, and Masculinity: How to have a more useful conversation.

"Honey, get me a beer!"

[coracle]

It wouldn't take a great deal of effort to clean it up.

Suspend or ban the two or three worst offenders and everyone would come into line.

Just DUMPING Canadian Visitor would achieve it in “ONE”. Eh!

[oladub]

This is an observation without a conclusion: The general direction in the Western world, including places like Japan, S. Korea, and Singapore, is for more equality and personal choice. In our country, women were allowed to vote, there are more reproductive choices. The trend allows more individual choice. We are now told that having children is an option. I am not quarreling with any of this. We have, on average, unparalleled prosperity and freedom compared with most non-Western countries and our ancestors.

However, the resulting prosperity and freedom seems to be more about individual choices than continuity of Western culture including such choices. Birth rates are in extreme decline Western Europe to East Asia. Societies dependent on population growth for prosperity have empty playgrounds and rapidly aging population. Japan has bridged part of the gap with robotization and increased debt. Angela Merkel opened Germany's borders to address the dearth of German babies. The next generation of 'Germans' may or may not be as supportive of longstanding Western freedoms, democracy, and traditions.

I find myself lamenting the possible decline of Western culture due to some lack of balance between sexual freedoms on one hand and sexual responsibility on the other. By 'sexual responsibility', I just mean making necessary personal sacrifices to sustain a population and culture. It does take a lot of work to raise children and biology puts a heavier part of that burden on women.

I don't have the answer. Some counties have tried to stabilize their declining populations with extended maternal leaves and other incentives without much result. How do western ideas and the progression of democracy, personal freedom, specifically women's rights survive economically and politically, without enough children?

[Honky Tonk]

Or conversely:

"Honey, take out the trash, would you!"

I'll have you know, when I was married, I always had the LAST word in MY house!

"yes dear...."

[Zacha341]

^^^ And here's more, haven't you heard THE FUTURE IS FEMALE anyway?!

Memo to Our Sons and Grandsons: The Future Is Female
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...-female?page=1

[Canadian Visitor]

This is an observation without a conclusion: The general direction in the Western world, including places like Japan, S. Korea, and Singapore, is for more equality and personal choice. In our country, women were allowed to vote, there are more reproductive choices. The trend allows more individual choice. We are now told that having children is an option. I am not quarreling with any of this. We have, on average, unparalleled prosperity and freedom compared with most non-Western countries and our ancestors.

However, the resulting prosperity and freedom seems to be more about individual choices than continuity of Western culture including such choices. Birth rates are in extreme decline Western Europe to East Asia. Societies dependent on population growth for prosperity have empty playgrounds and rapidly aging population. Japan has bridged part of the gap with robotization and increased debt. Angela Merkel opened Germany's borders to address the dearth of German babies. The next generation of 'Germans' may or may not be as supportive of longstanding Western freedoms, democracy, and traditions.

I find myself lamenting the possible decline of Western culture due to some lack of balance between sexual freedoms on one hand and sexual responsibility on the other. By 'sexual responsibility', I just mean making necessary personal sacrifices to sustain a population and culture. It does take a lot of work to raise children and biology puts a heavier part of that burden on women.

I don't have the answer. Some counties have tried to stabilize their declining populations with extended maternal leaves and other incentives without much result. How do western ideas and the progression of democracy, personal freedom, specifically women's rights survive economically and politically, without enough children?

TY for contributing to the discussion!

I think there are, as usual, a mixture of issues at play.

On the one hand, many places in the world are grossly over populated, and the advent of birth control, women's rights and higher education, contributing to a lowering birth rate must surely be a welcome thing.

Though, its not as if the rate lowers in a nice, steady, even way that allows for smooth transitions from era to the next.

ie. China's birth rate collapsed sufficiently that not only will its population fall quite dramatically in the years ahead, which will create workforce and pension issues..........due to a preference for male babies, there is a severe gender imbalance already having social consequences [[men out number women in the young adult generation by a substantial margin).

****

That said, the falling birth rate in developed societies, where acute, poses more of an issue, as noted in Japan, also in Italy.

Most other western, developed nations aren't so short of replacement value [[2.1 babies per woman) that it could be called an acute problem, but it will be, eventually, if not properly addressed.

****

In respect of the baby-having question, you need to ask why women [[and men/families) are choosing to have fewer children.

The evidence is that it is a function of 3 or 4 things in various degrees.

1) Settling down later in life, leaving a shorter window of fertility and one in competition with early career development for women.

2) Lower fertility rates at older ages for women.

3) Work-life balance questions. When both members of a couple work outside the home, the amount of house work doesn't decline, but the cost and hassle of childcare rises.

This provides a disincentive to baby-making.

4) Cost of raising a child to be successful has risen markedly in an era where families are expected to see a child go to University in most cases, and that not only means finding money for tuition, it means financial responsibility for your child extends later into their life and yours [[early 20s instead of late teens).

If one imagines not starting to have kids till 28, to have three, at one every second year, extends you to at least 32 [[fertility issues may already play into this).

But if you have to look after your kid until they are 23, you're not committed to kids in your home until you are 55.

That's not only a huge commitment, its one that may mean deferred retirement savings, which in turn may mean the need to defer retirement.

****

There are plethora of policy options that can make it easier on people to have a larger family, or to start one later in life.

Though, as you noted, countries where many of these have been pursued have only bumped up fertility rates modestly, and not to replacement value.

Which to me, leaves a couple of key questions to examine.

First, is the key to this getting people to start a family sooner [[particularly for women whose fertility is key to this); and if so, what adjustments would we have to make as a society to make this a preferred choice?

Second, if having more than 2 children will naturally, severely impact on a woman's career development, can we make any adjustments to workplace law or custom that would address that? Or alternatively, do we modify other aspects of social/economic policy [[outside the workplace) to allow for that, conceding there is no good policy solution in the work place?

****

Tangential to the above, is the question IF redistribution of the world's population is part of the answer to this issue in the near term [[people from overcrowded areas moving to regions that could support more people); how can we best handle the issue of integration of newcomers into established societies?

[Richard]

I'll have you know, when I was married, I always had the LAST word in MY house!

"yes dear...."

Lol,but with technology women are obsolete anyways in the sense that we know them now.

With Alexa and Siri all you have to do is command and they obey,no questions asked.

Automatic dishwashers,microwaves,Uber eats and soon drones deliver dinner to the door on demand,Chinese laundry is cheap,robo vacuum cleaners etc.,if you think about it women are kinda being phased out anyways,soon they will be just another guy,advanced medicines can change the thinking like a woman part and we will all be mindless little drudes equally.

Think about the songs during the decades that some will find offensive,Barbra Streisand can no longer be a woman in love,she has to be a gender neutral person in love,but she is no longer even a she.

No more a lady in red is dancing with me,it has to change to a person in red dancing in the same proximity as to not actually touch.

It could get really complicated.

[Honky Tonk]

Lol,but with technology women are obsolete anyways in the sense that we know them now.

With Alexa and Siri all you have to do is command and they obey,no questions asked.

Automatic dishwashers,microwaves,Uber eats and soon drones deliver dinner to the door on demand,Chinese laundry is cheap,robo vacuum cleaners etc.,if you think about it women are kinda being phased out anyways,soon they will be just another guy,advanced medicines can change the thinking like a woman part and we will all be mindless little drudes equally.

Think about the songs during the decades that some will find offensive,Barbra Streisand can no longer be a woman in love,she has to be a gender neutral person in love,but she is no longer even a she.

No more a lady in red is dancing with me,it has to change to a person in red dancing in the same proximity as to not actually touch.

It could get really complicated.

Tall and tan and young and lovely
The gender specific person from Ipanema goes walking
And when the gender specific person passes, each gender specific person they pass goes - ah

[Pam]

Climate change threatens to kill us all and some of you are worried about the birth rate? In a world of scarce resources fewer people is a good thing. Unless you want to look forward to this:

https://youtu.be/9IKVj4l5GU4

[Honky Tonk]

Climate change threatens to kill us all and some of you are worried about the birth rate? In a world of scarce resources fewer people is a good thing. Unless you want to look forward to this:

https://youtu.be/9IKVj4l5GU4

Actually I'm looking forward to the day I can enjoy a head of iceberg lettuce.

[Pam]

Actually I'm looking forward to the day I can enjoy a head of iceberg lettuce.

https://youtu.be/oShTJ90fC34

[Honky Tonk]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kQQ6wNfkcmc

[jcole]

Climate change threatens to kill us all and some of you are worried about the birth rate? In a world of scarce resources fewer people is a good thing. Unless you want to look forward to this:

https://youtu.be/9IKVj4l5GU4

The whole thread is reminiscent of what I had to endure in Catholic school in the 60/70's when they were worried about the Chinese having so many kids that they would take over the world so we were told that it was our DUTY to be good Catholic wives and have large families so we could keep up with the Communists.