General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Source of Masculine Toxicity.
Someone just recently asked in another mass shooting thread what it is about some men that they are so violent, why they seem to go psycho if a woman leaves/rejects them. My theory - we were never supposed to have this amount of self-determination and control over our lives.
A couple of weeks ago, I read the book, "The Woman They Could Not Silence", by Kate Moore. It's the true story of Elizabeth Packard. In 1860, just prior to the Civil War, her husband (who was also her pastor), had her committed to an asylum. Her sin? Thinking for herself. Why did he commit her? Because he could.
What she discovered while in the Illinois State Hospital were many, many women such as herself who were "put away" by the men in control of their lives for many times little to no reason except bucking their authority. Women had little power over their lives, even to protect themselves from their husbands and fathers, especially from them. She ended up there for three years, but never stopped fighting for her freedom, getting herself out, and most importantly fighting to free the other women she found there.
Many of us have known things like this existed for a very long time including: women not allowed to vote (and wouldn't be for another 60 years), women not allowed to own property or control their own homes or finances. As a matter of fact, women could not take out loans or hold any credit of their own until the mid-1970s, and worse, there was no such thing as "consent" in the marital bed until laws started to be changed in 1976 (the year I graduated HS) to outlaw spousal rape. THIS IS NOT OLD HISTORY!
Even if not having lived during the previous eras or unmarried, I believe there's still this undercurrent in some men who resent the progress women have made across the last 100 years through long, exhausting, painstaking efforts. They have been imbued with deep resentment of ALL of this because THEY lost all their power to control our lives. We are no longer forced to "make good marriages" and stay in them, regardless if we want them or not, or to tolerate abuse in any form.
And how could they ignore our right to reproduce as and if we choose, or not? In their minds, birth control and abortion have been very much at the root of the freedoms we've come to enjoy, while being very greatly resented by men, so that's the obvious place for them to be taking back their power. They known they're in for a major battle; several generations of women fought for these freedoms, and younger generations aren't about to be willing to divest themselves of all they've ever known.
Some men, usually those not in the seats of power in this country, can't deal with "unruly" women who won't give into their control and desires; they just simply lose it and take out their vengeance whenever, wherever and however possible. Not so easy to just manufacture ridiculous evidence of misbehavior and failure to "obey" any longer to have us "put away", so they resort to what's so very readily at hand and easily obtainable to nearly every single one of them: guns (and other physical violence.)
Bottom line: We're still very much fighting the same battle women always had to fight - for our very lives. We are not safe in this country if we let men in halls of power continue to strip our freedoms even a little bit, let alone the huge swaths they're aiming at. It emboldens these violent men who've no respect for women as fellow human beings with every right to equality, freedom and control over their own lives as they do.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
hippywife
(22,777 posts)Check out the article in this thread about the sex offender registry in AZ (and who knows where else):
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100217693371
She's talking about the 19-question assessment that determines what level a sex offender is designated.
Level One offenders are considered the lowest risk.
The assessment does not look at the crimes committed. Instead, it uses a list of 19 questions to make the assessment. One of the questions asks about the gender of the victim.
If the victim is a girl, the offender is given zero points. However, if the victim is a boy, they are given three points.
Karadeniz
(24,746 posts)homegirl
(1,965 posts)to post on local NOW web page. hippywife, how do we get permission to use this on our site?
homegirl@earthlink.net
halfulglas
(1,654 posts)After all, even in court in even fairly recent years a "sympathetic" judge has been known to let the man off with a slap on the wrist if the female victim, even very, very young, was described by the defendant as "seductive" toward him (in his own mind).
Scrivener7
(59,522 posts)wrist because of the seductive ways of the 5 year old.
GeoWilliam750
(2,555 posts)It will help illustrate the structural biases against women in the US, and show why there is little hope for women in the US.
Lots of interesting things in demographics these days, like how about 70-75 percent of babies being born in the world in the next 50 years will be born in Africa. I checked the data, and it looks good. For 2022, Africa, India and China had about the same populations, except that Africa had about a 46m birthrate, while India was about 23m, and China about 9-10m. Rechecking things, Africa has about the same birthrate as Asia from India east, and that is before their birthrate takes off.
The book discussed above is an excellent read.
Ilsa
(64,371 posts)Is that even legal anymore? 
GeoWilliam750
(2,555 posts)have about fallen to 2.1 - the rate at which a population will only reproduce itself - and is heading south rapidly.
Most of the world still above 2.1 is Islamic and/or African. It is truly sad, but the patriarchy has not behaved in its best interests.
Ilsa
(64,371 posts)women were able to get birth control and decided to defy the Pope (since most were Roman Catholic). Once they discovered financial freedom by controlling the number of kids they bear, the exploding birth rates were pretty much over.
GeoWilliam750
(2,555 posts)hippywife
(22,777 posts)that one of the book groups on Mastodon is reading. Interesting data. You'd think those stats would be even more alarming to the RWNJs than immigration numbers. My guess is that they are, but they can't quite come out and say it out loud yet.
GeoWilliam750
(2,555 posts)What people have not been aware of is that Africa is far more genetically diverse than the rest of the world, with much medicine effectively having used people with Caucasian ancestry, and many of these are reacting poorly with non-Caucasian populations.
Very interestingly, one of the ways to slow down world population growth would be to establish television stations showing successful women building careers in Africa.
Scrivener7
(59,522 posts)JanMichael
(25,725 posts)Fortunately I have given (not really given, she practically took it!) almost all control of our finances to my spouse.
But then I think about the whole credit cards for men only until early 70s in the United States, how pathetic.
What's really kind of disgusting as I work with a lot of people who probably approve of this sort of behavior. And I can't really say anything about it because I'm in a professional situation and I would get in trouble for bringing it up.
This world sucks sometimes. No it sucks damn near all the time.
GeoWilliam750
(2,555 posts)JanMichael
(25,725 posts)
CaliforniaPeggy
(156,619 posts)Brava! Kudos! Brilliant!
Thank you so much.
MuseRider
(35,176 posts)I had a teacher who had his wife "put away". Everyone knew he did it so he could marry his girlfriend. His ex died in the institution.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)than to be locked up against one's will without recourse and a whole system developed to work against you.
Joinfortmill
(21,165 posts)I have hope because the vast majority of the younger generations, including men, want equality for everyone. That said, this horrible push to shove women and minorities back down is disheartening. But, together we will persevere. Take heart.
Walleye
(44,806 posts)hippywife
(22,777 posts)the battle's never been fully won. And, you're right, it is exhausting, in every possible way.
Walleye
(44,806 posts)And now we have to go back and re-fight the ones we thought we had won. Eternal vigilance
hippywife
(22,777 posts)but not the war. There's been too much left undone on the equality front for too long. We're still mired in too much inequality and all of its causes if we don't address the systemic issues that were left to linger.
Walleye
(44,806 posts)hippywife
(22,777 posts)that was a set back, for sure. But the fight goes on, if not for us so much any longer, for those women coming up.
Walleye
(44,806 posts)Check out the reruns of some of the 50s TV shows, westerns and sitcom, it’s all about girls and women staying in their place. And men settling arguments with guns. Boys are never taught to deal with disappointment the way girls are. We grow up expecting to be disappointed. They can’t handle it
electric_blue68
(26,856 posts)And there was almost no liberal radio talkers anywhere!
After Bill Clinton was elected he had callers saying "should take the vote away from women !!??!!!!
keithbvadu2
(40,915 posts)Alabama Republican Senate Candidate Roy Moore co-authored a study course, published in 2011 and recently obtained by ThinkProgress, that instructs students that women should not be permitted to run for elected office. If women do run for office, the course argues, people have a moral obligation not to vote for them.
-------------
Some women would give up the right to vote in order to elect Trump
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-trump-backers-tweet-repealthe19th-1476299001-htmlstory.html
(about halfway down the page)
Oct. 12, 2016,
Trump backers tweet #repealthe19th after polls show he'd win if only men voted
As polls show that Donald Trump would overwhelmingly win if only men were allowed to vote, the GOP nominee's supporters have spawned a new Twitter hashtag: #repealthe19th.
That’s a reference to the 19th Amendment, which gave women the right to vote.
treestar
(82,383 posts)or take forever to go completely away. Women have made tremendous steps forward. But there's still some ancient ideas in the brains that men should dominate.
Some of them try to make us pay, thinking that will make women go back. Like the ones who now opt out, saying they won't marry or be with any woman if they can't have total control. Like if I can't control you, then you can't have me at all.
This too will go away, but it could take a very long time.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)There's way too much of this lingering resentment over all we've won and continue to accomplish in all spheres of society. In many ways, both provable and unprovable, even some of those who don't act out violently are still making us pay wherever possible within the structures of society: i.e. jobs, wages to name just a couple.
I don't know how long it will take to finally disappear as many men pass this attitude around among themselves and on to their sons, and are being even more encouraged by the christo-fascist right wing.
treestar
(82,383 posts)that's making it tougher. Phyllis Schlafly and her like. Perjury Traitor Greene and the like, even elected to Congress, but still touting submission even when in authority themselves!
hippywife
(22,777 posts)are worse than the men in my mind.
Walleye
(44,806 posts)electric_blue68
(26,856 posts)Walleye
(44,806 posts)For women who made it to the top and didn’t help other women
electric_blue68
(26,856 posts)
BlueWaveNeverEnd
(14,239 posts)Dr. Laura was hypocrisy in human form.
Lonestarblue
(13,480 posts)I will never forget the words of the father of the Stanford college kid who raped an unconscious woman. He said something along the line of a rape only fakes about 20 minutes. A woman should just lie back and enjoy it. That is my definition of toxic masculinity—the idea that any woman’s body is yours to control, whether through rape or forced pregnancy.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)A MI lawmaker (thankfully) lost his seat for admitting to advising his daughters to do the same!
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2022-election/michigan-gop-candidate-fire-rape-analogy-tells-daughters-lie-back-enjo-rcna19350
Make no mistake - this attitude itself is a form of violence.
calimary
(90,021 posts)“fall in love”, so to speak, with his hand. I’d be gone.
I don’t know how I lucked into the guy I married, but he is totally liberated and remains super supportive.
Whatthe_Firetruck
(610 posts)... With the tag line of "Misogyny - We mock it." They report on this sort of nonsense.
https://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/
What?
We Hunted the Mammoth: The FAQ-ening
Q) A mammoth, huh? What’s this blog about?
A) Misogyny, not mammoths.
Specifically, this blog focuses on what I call the “New Misogyny,” an angry antifeminist backlash that has emerged like a boil on the ass of the internet over the last decade or so. These aren’t your traditional misogynists – the social conservatives and religious fundamentalists who make up much of the far right.
These are guys, mostly, who range in age from their teens to their fifties, who have embraced misogyny as an ideology, as a sort of symbolic solution to the frustrations in their lives – whether financial, social, or sexual.
Some of them identify as Men’s Rights Activists, trying to cast their peculiar struggle against what they see as the excess of feminism and the advantages of women as a civil rights issue of sorts. Alongside those who explicitly label themselves MRAs we find a great number of antifeminist and antiwomen activists we might call Men’s Rights-adjacent – like those in the Skeptic and Atheist subcultures who still haven’t gotten over an offhand remark Skepchick founder Rebecca Watson made about a dude in an elevator a couple of years ago.
Clip
Why?
Q) Ok, but you still haven’t explained the mammoth thing.
A) This is a reference to a quote I once posted from a dude who felt women weren’t sufficiently appreciative of what men had supposedly done for them over the ages. Here’s the quote, in all of its weird glory:
"We men built a nice safe world for you all the the coal-mines of death, roads, railroads, bridges and tall office buildings. Its $1,000,000 spent per death of a man on a large dangerous project on average now you can just 9-5 it and call it a day in air-conditioned and heated safety. Forget about the wars we died in and the sacrifices made just ignore history or is it now hersorty? You are accruing the benefits without ever having to pay the price you still don’t have to sign up for the draft and who will protect you? The Sex and the City girls will fight off the North Koreans with their Manolo Blahniks?
Men gave you this modern world now you take it for granted we hunted the mammoth to feed you we died in burning buildings and were gassed in the trenches but that was just for fun right?
How quick and conveniently you forget who made this possible.
We gave you Leonardo da Vinci, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy not to mention countless others, Jonas Salk saved half the world from death and you just piss on it all."
This quote is such an amazing clusterfuck of misogyny, entitlement and unwarranted self-importance – not to mention historical ignorance – that the bit about mammoths became a catchphrase around here, neatly conveying pretty much everything this blog is against. And so I decided to make it the name of the blog.
treestar
(82,383 posts)and wanted to build all that for their own benefit?
They forgot who gave birth to them and their descendants. And are ignorant of matriarchal cultures that existed.
The Magistrate
(96,043 posts)
Glamrock
(12,003 posts)I've been lucky enough as a white male to coast through life without many worries. Don't get me wrong, times have been tough due to my stupid decisions. But i've never had to overcome the hurdles that my sisters have had to. And for that? Tall respect. I've always been on your side, but posts like these put it in perspective. And for that, you have me gratitude.
cbabe
(6,648 posts)Not funny.
Bang Zoom ...You're Going to the Moon!
https://m.
electric_blue68
(26,856 posts)
wnylib
(26,014 posts)Sky Jewels
(9,148 posts)We've gone backwards in some areas!
Thank goodness great portions of the younger generations are rejecting Christianity, the primary vehicle for pushing and enforcing patriarchy in this country. Christianity's ridiculous basic mythology depicts the omnipotent god/ruler of the universe and "his" magical undead offspring as males, of course. That just says it all.
colorado_ufo
(6,252 posts)When we first moved to Colorado from the south, we badly needed snow tires. I was fully employed by a company I had been with in the south, but my husband was still job hunting. I went to Montgomery Ward (I'm pretty sure it was them, not Sears) to purchase the tires, and they refused to open an account in my name. They said it was because my husband (who had a master's degree) was unemployed. I was stunned!
hippywife
(22,777 posts)a friend of my old boss (and friend) went to buy a car. The salesman asked her when her husband was going to come look at it. She told him she wasn't married and was buying the car for herself. He then asked about her father. He just was not going to accept that she was fully capable of making this purchase.
Her response to him: she got up out of her seat and told him that NO ONE WITH A DICK was going to be involved in this purchase, including him, and walked out the door. Hopefully, that was a lesson he and his paycheck learned from.
colorado_ufo
(6,252 posts)
hippywife
(22,777 posts)
leftyladyfrommo
(20,005 posts)They may be smart and nice and all that but they don't seem to have a clue what being a husband really entails. Wives are for sex, cleaning up and making a second income.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)They sure do enjoy that second income, while still piling most of the effort to keep house and home together on the shoulders of their wives. Even some men who are overall good husbands still don't see they are doing this.
Elessar Zappa
(16,385 posts)are better about treating women right than men in the past, imo. Still tons of misogynists out there, as evidenced by our current Supreme Court and Republican Party.
Walleye
(44,806 posts)hippywife
(22,777 posts)and overall things are better for women (because of women) it doesn't excuse the whole systems that, for some reason, the patriarchy refuses to dismantle.
halfulglas
(1,654 posts)Have strong mothers who teach their sons to take care of themselves and not expect to be catered to. So many of today's crappy husbands had mothers who waited on their golden boy.
treestar
(82,383 posts)according to Dad, she told her sons not to expect their sisters to do any chores they weren't doing.
And that goes back to the feminine mystique generation.
momta
(4,197 posts) hippywife
(22,777 posts)may not act out violently, at least maybe not physically, but I consider what they're now doing to be a form of stochastic terrorism. No blood on their hands, as far as they're concerned, just red ink.
lindysalsagal
(22,915 posts)They feel entitled to it. The, add racism and religious intolerance and you're ahead of 70-80%, regardless of intelligence or accomplishments.
Men fear women: They remember being dependent on their mothers, and resent any incursion on their superiority.
There's a name for resistance against the patriarchy: It's called feminism. Welcome to the fight. 
DENVERPOPS
(13,003 posts)My hippy wife calls it: TEENIE WEENIE PEENIE COMPLEX.......TWPC for short.........
As "first in" medic on countless battered wife calls, we saw it all...........
One time, another firefighter/EMT asked me.......have you ever noticed, that by the time we get on scene, the perp batterer is always long gone so he won't have to deal with us "real men" ?????????????
SheltieLover
(80,459 posts)
Act_of_Reparation
(9,116 posts)At least for mass shootings... though it also does a pretty good job of explaining smaller-scale, acts of individual violence.
Amonie is somewhat similar to what you describe, though, so I'd say you're on the right track.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)where across our population, the problem is much greater and deeper. It's definitely a societal problem in many different ways.
wnylib
(26,014 posts)although probably not intended to be.
And yes, it runs across society in some complex ways that are both social and individually psychological.
Scrivener7
(59,522 posts)leading to social erosion.
I have to disagree with you. In almost every mass shooting event, if you scratch its surface, the man has been recently rejected by a woman or women. Often, that woman is the first victim of the shooter. If that is not a factor, then at least violent abuse of the woman in his life usually is.
Perhaps our opinions converge with the more recent surge in mass shooting events on the fact that the cause of the deterioration of standards and values is the increased social acceptance of rampant and violent sexism.
Caliman73
(11,767 posts)Anomie would imply that the values and systems set up were good to begin with. The values on which the "system" was founded have been rooted in male dominance and female subservience. You can see it from the beginnings of society, when only men were allowed to be priests, where women were considered overly emotional and needed protecting.
The problem is that men have defined each other throughout history, in terms of power and dominance, over each other, over nature, and over women. As women have slowly and painfully gained more rights to full participation in society, men have failed to adapt to changing roles and defining characteristics. You here it in Conservative circles most clearly with men decrying "feminism" and "woke" ideologies, talking about how men can no longer be men. The reality is that who and what men and women do, is not fixed, except in limited ways. Much of how we operate in society, especially these days as physical strength has diminished in importance, is socially constructed and not determined biologically. There are still size and strength differences, perceptual, and focus differences; all within overlapping ranges, but those physiological characteristics are not as determinative as once thought.
There is a conflict within men, especially younger men, that is brought on by the very society they were told in both subtle and non-subtle ways, that they would control and dominate. You can see it in the "incel" movement and larger "manosphere" where people are basically saying, "this isn't turning out the way I was told it would" except they blame "hypergamous women", feminism, and a bunch of other things rather than looking at the hole we dug for ourselves.
This is a "male" problem, not as much an erosion of values as focusing on the wrong values to begin with. Unfortunately both women and men are victims, though women suffer as a result of men's actions and we suffer at our own choices.
Act_of_Reparation
(9,116 posts)1. Anomie does not assume the values and the systems are good, simply that they provide citizens with structure and sense of purpose.
2. I agree that this is a male problem. My position, though, is that these issues have to do with how men are brought up and socialized. We are raised to think we're masters of the universe, that our "role" in society is to dominate and assert our will over others this selfsame system has prescribed innate passivity. As this social arrangement is incongruous with reality (and, you know, ethics), men who feel they need to dominate others and yet find themselves unable to do so are prone to acts of violence.
Scrivener7
(59,522 posts)Such a great post!
Delmette2.0
(4,504 posts)While females are referred to as girls well into their 20's and older, especially if they are not married.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)infantilized, considered not capable, and it shows up even in very small ways like this.
sanatanadharma
(4,089 posts)Seeking a pre-pubescent look?
How we elders do fail when our youth revert to the ways we fought against.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)we haven't passed down enough of our wisdom and experience because we figured we had made positive change and it would continue to progress in that same manner. We put down our signs and thought we'd won, in addition to all the things that never changed for us when we got those big ones under our belts. We've failed to properly educate on the what people are capable of, both negative and positive, from the past, present and into the future.
GeoWilliam750
(2,555 posts)I would have to recheck the statistics, but women score higher on college application tests, score about 10% higher on average GPA - with a tougher course load, have a much higher completion rate on high school graduation, and are still poorly represented in university.
I (male) still wonder why more corporations do not hire larger percentages of women, and often tried to hire women when possible.
A final bonus is that they usually seemed to listen to their managers better. Perhaps I was just blessed with good staff.
Scrivener7
(59,522 posts)an "underage woman."
Which makes me want to spit nails.
Delmette2.0
(4,504 posts)hippywife
(22,777 posts)Those we choose reveal a lot about us. Using that phrase gives them plausible deniability for fault.
raccoon
(32,390 posts)
betsuni
(29,078 posts)but they mean a woman in her early twenties. Very confusing.
Delmette2.0
(4,504 posts)Woman, as in an adult who is intelligent and capable.
wryter2000
(47,940 posts) 
NJCher
(43,165 posts)I was reading magazine articles about this guy I used to date a few decades ago. He became famous after I dated him, thus the magazine articles.
He had told me nothing of his personal life so I was interested to read he had a "starter" marriage. It only lasted one year and when he was asked by the reporter what happened, he responded (paraphrase here, because his real words were a little too vivid) that she wanted him to be in the traditional role while she "supported" him.
He said, "I just couldn't have that."
I burst out laughing.
I still love that man. What a rarity.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)He said, "I just couldn't have that."
Why couldn't he "have that"? I respect his personal choice to want to further his own career, no problem there with individual choices like that, but fear the absolute dogma in this area may very well be due to the very patriarchal attitudes that make all the rest of the discrimination and violence against women possible.
NJCher
(43,165 posts)He meant he wanted an equal partner, one with her own mind, philosophy, career, goals, etc.
He wanted to share his life with someone who had that going for her.
electric_blue68
(26,856 posts)hippywife
(22,777 posts)but those words are an odd choice that could well reveal some lingering misogynistic ideals. To me, at least, they indicate the presence of the male ego where women are concerned.
electric_blue68
(26,856 posts)NJCher
(43,165 posts)complete equality is where he's coming from.
For some strange reason I am surrounded by men who are aloof to marriage or even live-in relationships. I can think of five right at this moment.
When they do have relationships with women, they are almost always with professional women who have stellar careers. But overall, they are indifferent to "finding" someone. They don't look for relationships and seem to have satisfying, interesting lives without a steady someone.
I honestly think that if the RG didn't have me, he would make absolutely no effort to get into a relationship.
Recently the RG and I had dinner with one of indifferent men I mention in my second paragraph, a professional who travels the world and has a prestigious job which requires several advanced degrees. He mentioned he had stayed with a childhood friend while he visited Spain. I asked what the friend's wife was like and he said, "Oh he's not married. He's just trying to get through life without this wife and kid thing, like I am."
Another moment where I burst out laughing.
These guys just want to have a life without strings. I think they are wary of getting sidetracked from their career goals. If they could find a woman who could work with that, they would probably be involved with someone.
They are the opposite of the kind of guy you're describing. These guys can't be bothered with suppressing any women. In their minds, they have more important things to do in life.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)than tolerate the bother of women in theirs. We're apparently too much trouble and bring nothing of benefit.
NJCher
(43,165 posts)you are exactly right: if the "bother" is "let's have kids," "let's buy a house together," etc.
I have so many girlfriends complaining about no men. Of course there's no man in their life: they are acculturated to all this stuff like permanent togetherness, taking half the man's income if they can in the event of a divorce, children, which require an enormous amount of time and commitment. These guys are super-smart and see down the road where things could up-end themselves.
I actually think you have to hand it to them for not getting into commitments when they know they can't live up to them
I think you don't give women enough credit. There are women who can have independent, free lives and they would attract a man like this. It's just that there are very few of them. Hard to find, and even when men do find them, it is so unusual that the man has trust issues.
If I were a man, i would probably be just like these guys.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)let's have kids and buy a house together may be these men's issues, but there are still many who consider their time too much to ask. And I don't really believe there are very few women who can have independent lives, there are plenty, and most who desire that. Unfortunately, too many are brought up to believe marriage is their GOAL! I mean just look at the plethora of fairy talesthat reinforce that idea. Easy to integrate into thought and life as they seem so innocent. 
And don't even get me started on rapey romance novels. Ugh!
I'm glad you and I have a history where we can discuss this peacefully, even if we don't exactly see eye to eye on the topic.
What you say here:
Unfortunately, too many are brought up to believe marriage is their GOAL!
is exactly what I'm talking about.
Side story:
When I was in my Master's program, I had this very smart colleague who I just knew would be a valuable contributor in our field of speech communication. When she stood up to debate, she was brilliant. Kind of like Political Girl; that's who she reminded me of.
She got married and invited me to the wedding. I remember one of the items in the gift basket for guests was Men in Black sunglasses.
This was decades ago and she spent $60 grand on the wedding. Her family did not necessarily have that.
Stopped by her new house one day and was shocked when she took me on the house tour. The bedroom was a shrine to getting married! Big portrait of the two in their wedding garb on the dresser. Elaborate frame, like something out of trump's penthouse.
Stationed around the house: Photo albums of the wedding, reception, and honeymoon.
I just could not believe this.
Flash forward 30 years: I get Christmas cards in the form of a photo of her two daughters.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)that it can be really hard to extract it. Some women take longer to figure it out based on their own life experiences, some never do and attribute their entire self worth to that ring on their finger, regardless of how happy they may or may not be.
My advice to young women has always been to wait - until you've lived on your own and have the confidence to know, come hell or high water, you can take care of yourself, or at least have a good support system, that you come to realize you are complete as a person and feel good about who you are and what you've accomplished for yourself based on your own wishes for your life. I feel then, and only then, can you make the wisest decisions should you decide you want to marry.
johnnyplankton
(635 posts)oldsoftie
(13,538 posts)I've heard family stories that are wild
hippywife
(22,777 posts)but it doesn't take away from the fact that most of the time, it was women who were considered "hysterical" for no reason whatsoever, and the men who perpetrated this almost never paid the price in their own lives and careers.
Even the word "hysterical" made its way into medical practices, was used to treat them physically in abusive ways, as well as mentally, as incompetent. Our whole system of medicine has long treated women as second class, and in many ways still does.
Tree-Hugger
(3,379 posts)The "hyster-" in "hysterical" refers to the uterus. The misogyny is everywhere, even language.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)
txwhitedove
(4,385 posts)"You have to agree with me, you're my wife!"
"Why do you use those big words when we argue?"
But, when I laughed at being yelled at for first time, SMACK, "Stop."
"You're too independent, you must be a dyke "
So, although I absolutely love men, I will never have another relationship and live peacefully in my own home without one. And yet, even at the age of 72, my insurance company describes me as "unmarried female" because their risk assessment crap game thinks I am more of a risk being unmarried. Say what?
hippywife
(22,777 posts)I feel the same as you. I absolutely love my husband, he's really a wonderful person. We've had some snags and worked our way through them, clumsily at times, but I wouldn't want anything to happen to him or our marriage, however, if I found myself single again for whatever reason, single I would stay.
Before I married, I told my sisters and friends, "Good, bad or indifferent, no matter how this turns out, this is the only time I plan on doing this." and I meant it.
GeoWilliam750
(2,555 posts)I have only known one happy man who married up..
He was gay
CanonRay
(16,171 posts)to the very same hospital in Elgin, IL, and died there.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)How horrible for her. 
electric_blue68
(26,856 posts)It's the friggin' 1970s?!!!!!
It's like at the 3 Women's Marches I attended with the signs -
"I'm still marching for this stuff??!!!"
I only stopped going bc of Covid.
And now so many women's life in danger bc of Roe's reversal?! In 2022!!???
Plus the efforts to expand the various prohabitions around it.
There was an article on a totally different site along the lines of - Women put up with soft sexism to avoid violent sexism. And that isn't even always true either.
I'm grateful for genuine male allies; but a lot of men, and some (should be none!) women still believe in, and act in those ways.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)my father was an abuser, in every way but sexual: physical, mental and emotional, so I can sort of understand that mentality. When you're absolutely stuck in a situation, all you can do is try to keep the worst of it at bay just to survive until you can escape.
electric_blue68
(26,856 posts)There are so many stories out there... 😔.
Have to take a nap... More later re my dad
hippywife
(22,777 posts)I just can't help but wonder why so many people so selfishly don't get that they are more free, and even accrue benefits, when many more people are also free.
electric_blue68
(26,856 posts)electric_blue68
(26,856 posts)A complicated mix of smart, caring, friendly, fun loving, a good sense of design, interested in science, enjoyed nature, and the places he visited when he traveled during a certain job to meet with regional represetitives, involved on the community board, then with later serious depression in middle middle age that with 3 bouts of it onward got him meaner, and meaner verbally. His parents were both serious alcholics so their were hidden issues.
Anyway, I'm the first of 2 (have a younger sister). I think my dad lucked out with me because I had mixed passions (late 1950s into the '60s) when it came to "gendered" interests. I loved fashion, jewelry, and also building things (tinker toys, legos, etc), science, wooden trains & tracks, sports.
He (nor my mom) ever discouraged me from any of this. He might been happy he had a daughter who loved "boy" pursuits.
Now weirdly when I was 16 or 17 he showed me an article from a Ukrainian Catholic newsletter about the woman being behind the man influencing him (?vs her going out there, and doing it herself - at least that's how I read it, and only read it once). Didn't like it but he never went on about it.
Then decades later at one our extended family Christmas get togethers the MIL of my cousin's hosting the get together was on about women not needing (or something like that) to go to college. My dad got all huffy saying how proud he was that both his daughters went to, and finished College. Made me happy.
TygrBright
(21,362 posts)Our function is to receive and gestate future patriarchs and more wombs to gestate more patriarchs.
Also, we provide recreation and can be tasked with all the shitty stuff they don't want to do.
When the livestock starts acting like it thinks it has human rights, of COURSE the real humans, the ones with the penises, are gonna get stroppy.
wearily,
Bright
Hekate
(100,133 posts) GeoWilliam750
(2,555 posts)ABSOLUTELY NOTHING is more important than being an excellent mother. Yes, I am a radically strong feminist - and male.
By definition, women have a greater share of child rearing, and women`s reaction these days is that they do not want to do any more of it, with the result that fertility rates around the world are falling - except in Africa and some Islamic countries. Men are not able to carry their share of the daily work load, and generally do not want to do so.
Having done a quite fair bit of work on demographics over time, I was a little surprised to learn that the most genetically diverse society - Africa - will generate about 75% of the world`s births over the next 50 years - I checked the data. Already, Africa has about as many births as Asia from east of India (Africa, India and China have the same populations of 1.4bn, except Africa has 46m births per year, India about 23m, and China at 9m). Even India is now down to about replacement rate on population growth at about 2.1 on a fertility rate.
Really, people should look at global population trends - it is truly fascinating, and women will eventually get to decide most issues.
Jon King
(1,910 posts)Speaking of toxic, seems like so many white guys from 25-40 are walking around livid at the world. We were just in a Publix and seems like every white guy in that age group storms around the store with a nasty puss on their face and almost dares anyone to not get out of their way.
Never remember myself or my friends ever being that angry on a daily basis at that age.
Hope22
(4,746 posts)Even the ‘good men’ do not understand how it feels to walk their country of birth and have their rights ripped from them before their eyes. We are madder than hell but we just can’t get to the platform to speak. Our women’s marches get smaller! Why is that? It is more than time for women to walk out / strike until this is decided. ERA, body autonomy, economic equality and laws that discriminate against gender / transgender need to be implemented. It is going to take something big to get our rights back!
is the same exact concept of privilege that applies in racism. They don't understand because they don't experience it, most don't even SEE it, and too many encourage it, or are at least fine with its continuation or whatever comes to pass to limit it.
Hope22
(4,746 posts)….educated and intelligent and even they do…not…get…it! I fear for the safety of my future daughter in law with words no future grandma ever uttered…it’s not safe here honey. Think twice about a baby! I make the calls, write the emails, support the league of women voters. I beg the men to do the same. Nothing, crickets, followed by their hand wringing! To say that I am pissed is an understatement!
OMGWTF
(5,131 posts)has helped foster a lot of misogyny today.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)Made up, written by and promulgated by men.
Sky Jewels
(9,148 posts)…twisted tall tales about an asshole toxic male sky god and his magical child who is also a male, of course…Women don’t count for shit in Christianity. What a steaming pantload. It’s all intended to advance and entrench patriarchy.
ismnotwasm
(42,674 posts) Silent3
(15,909 posts)There's a bigger picture in which toxic men don't want to accommodate anyone or anything other than their own desires. It's the idea that "strength" means getting your own way, never having to admit you're wrong, never apologizing to anyone for anything.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)Patriarchy and misogyny are the very foundation and undergirding of our societies. They definitely set the stage, as well as its continuation. Who threatens that ideal they're walking around with in their heads? Which is why, more often than not, women are the victims of their behavior.
Silent3
(15,909 posts)Women are more often the victims of men's sexual violence, and are also seen as generally less capable of fighting back against other physical violence. I think there's a tendency to view man-on-man violence as not very important, or maybe even deserved.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)I don't know of anyone, of either gender, who considers this kind of violence not very important. But as far as outright abuse, of any nature at all, women appear the easiest target: physically, mentally, emotionally and economically. It's just imbedded in our systems, and so it goes on with very little change when there should have been this reckoning at least 50 years ago, if not a very long time ago.
Silent3
(15,909 posts)While there have been a few matriarchal societies here and there, they are the exception, not the norm. I think what is required is an on-going effort to tame some of what testosterone can do to human behavior, or else this ugly side of masculinity will remain. Mere awareness of the problem won't be enough.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)While there have been flourishing matriarchal societies, they've been way too far and few between, and few, if any at all, in more recent times. Our ENTIRE mythology has been too tied to the patriarchy being THE position of strength for millenia. It seems there have been no truly matriarchal societies at least since the advent of organized religion, except among peoples who didn't subscribe. Go that long with only the patriarchy recognized as deserving, even men who don't really believe that haven't seemed terribly inclined to change things.
Heck, if anything, watching what women go through in order that continued life is possible, you'd think men would be scared of us for very different reasons, coz we be badass! I'd even posit that allowing men in the delivery room has been a positive towards changing some minds, or at least made them more appreciative. Doesn't mean enough men on board enough to fight along side, unfortunately.
If I would personally attribute anything to biology, it's the physical strength so many men have over women that makes them take us for granted at best, and have no compunction about abusing and holding us down, at worst.
Silent3
(15,909 posts)Is patriarchy such powerful meme (in the original sense of that word, not the internet usage) that is spreads nearly uncontrollably across continents and oceans and centuries of time?
Biology is the far simpler explanation.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)Occam's razor isn't always the correct answer, tho, and not everything can be attributed to biological factors.
If two people, a man and a woman, without any knowledge of gender at all, it's my firm belief that they would have seen each other as equals in every way, except maybe physical strength depending on the two people, and going forward, society would have been more one of cooperation between the genders, building on one another's' strengths, rather than the subjugation of one of them.
Imagine if children had always been raised that way rather than being fed all the gender mythology that permeates our entire society, top to bottom. Children look at one another, they spot the differences, but aren't naturally inclined to rejection of one another because of them. Children almost universally LOVE other children and their first inclination toward one another is love and acceptance, until we teach it out of them, in word and deed.
Silent3
(15,909 posts)For instance, when you say, "Our ENTIRE mythology has been too tied to the patriarchy", who is OUR? This planet doesn't have one consistent OUR, culturally speaking.
wnylib
(26,014 posts)there has been more gender egalitarianism than often recognized. Such societies have divisions of labor and social roles defined by gender (usually for practical reasons), but equally valued, with a balance of power in decision making.
Several, though not all, pre Columbian societies in the Americas were/are like that, not just among tribal societies but also in the more advanced civilizations. This is also true about some other parts of the world at different times in history.
But our educational systems and religious institutions have not given much attention to those social structures except to criticize and ridicule them.
Biology certainly plays a part in how societies are structured, but does not play a role in attitudes about equality unless socially structured to do so.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)and am now on a sit down break.
We all have the same origins. Over time, a whole lot of time, societies were organized for things like safety and survival. Not sure what the cause was for some to organize differently regarding gender, how that would have even come about, but mopinko and I have been discussing this down thread. However, what I said in my post above that addresses this:
I'm not an anthropologist, but it seems to me members of early peoples weren't necessarily smarter than one another, science has long debunked the idea women have smaller brains and are not as smart. It's quite the leap in logic from, "Hey! You aren't physically strong enough to do this thing..." to ..."so you aren't worthy of being treated equally." based strictly on gender. (And what exactly was their concept of gender?) Sure, if someone did nothing to contribute I could see that, but not if they had all kinds of other things they were good at and well-equipped to contribute.
Regardless, as I said above, it's been our mythology at least since the advent of monotheistic religion.
I dunno, we'll probably never know some of these things with absolute certainty, so it's just fun to spitball basing on what we do know.
shrike3
(5,370 posts)The Greeks were not monotheists, but they gave their women almost no rights.
I think it's probably complicated, and that biology may play some role.
chowmama
(1,096 posts)They cleaned up the old stories, took out the bawdy bits, and added a lot of their own prejudices. Some of the original stories were a lot better for women.
It takes wealth to have the kind of social structure to have a class that will allow women to stay home and be ladylike. Pioneer times in the US weren't as represented by Republic Pictures. If you had any kind of a place, you'd be away from home a lot. The wife managed the whole homestead by herself. If the roof started leaking and she couldn't bring herself to put on dungarees, get a ladder and fix it, you'd married the wrong woman. Some of those women were tougher than the men.
Mrs. Beeton and her ilk started deciding what parts of genteel life needed to be imitated by the middle class (and what parts shouldn't be. I believe one of her sentences included "if you feel you must ape your betters"
. As with advertising today, a large part of it was making a profit by inducing guilt and a lack of self-esteem. In the London slums, nobody could afford to live that way, but they all felt the pressure. We're still feeling it today.
Going back a ways, I'm going to get the numbers wrong, but you'll get the idea. There was a saying that went "It takes 7 Romans to defeat one Celt, and 17 Romans if his wife is with him". (These were European Celts; the Romans didn't get to Ireland.) Women fought and Romans feared them as much, if not more, than the men. That's not prehistory, it's early civilization. I've read that the old Irish marriage contract ran 7 years and either party could decline to re-up for the next 7.
In a hardscrabble society, which covers more of human history than civilized modern times, humans can't afford to make distinctions. If there's a problem and you're the one at hand, you're the one who gets to fix it. If there's no beast on hand, one of you is going to steer the plow and the other is going to pull it. Nobody ends up clean, let alone refined.
I think that, given the time frame of prehistory and history as one whole, this is a relatively new phenomenon, and not driven by genetics.
malaise
(296,105 posts)They are all patriarchal
Silent3
(15,909 posts)There’s a huge diversity of religions, so why would so many take on a patriarchical bent? I’d still say it’s in the biology of the people developing those religions.
malaise
(296,105 posts)Who knows
LymphocyteLover
(9,847 posts)Silent3
(15,909 posts)...and avoiding why either a patriarchal religion or a patriarchal order maintained by a patriarchal religion would be so widespread across so many places and cultures and times in the first place.
The commonality of biology is still the best bet for a common cause.
LymphocyteLover
(9,847 posts)the tone for them to dominate primitive society
shrike3
(5,370 posts)I think it's even simpler than that. A desire to raise one's own offspring. Certain mammals kill unrelated offspring (some, like tigers, will kill their own offspring)so that the female will come back in estrus and conceive the usurper's offspring. Males control the female's sexuality so as to further their own genes. I'm perfectly willing to be ridiculed; I don't mind. But it plays such a role even in today's domestic situations. Children are most vulnerable when there's unrelated male in the house.
LymphocyteLover
(9,847 posts)I suspect the greater physical strength of males is determinitive though for them being dominant in so many cultures
shrike3
(5,370 posts)Last edited Fri Mar 3, 2023, 02:47 PM - Edit history (1)
But enough. I agree with you as well, i.e., physical strength. It was the males' job to protect women and children from harm.
It also seems the male viewpoint in many cultures involves the control of women's sexuality, and I think part of that is the desire to pass on one's own genes, a drive we see in many of our fellow mammals.
LymphocyteLover
(9,847 posts)promote it whereas it's much more taxing and even life-threatening for women and they will seek to limit reproduction.
shrike3
(5,370 posts) LymphocyteLover
(9,847 posts)being a Democrat.
Vote Blue for women! (obviously 
)
shrike3
(5,370 posts) shrike3
(5,370 posts)Some mammals kill another's offspring so that the female will mate again. I'm not humans are conscious of it. But children are very vulnerable when there's an unrelated male in the house.
in2herbs
(4,390 posts)The other day someone posted a Salon article which included review of a book titled “Madame Restell: The Life, Death, and Resurrection of Old New York's Most Fabulous, Fearless, and Infamous Abortionist” by Jennifer Wright. I purchased the book on Kindle and, IMO, this book is very well-written and includes comparisons to the past and present GOP agenda, and also the past and present role journalism and religion has played and is playing throughout the world to sustain the patriarchal agenda.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)and plan on reading it soon. While it's the GOP and christo-fascist plan, too many men either don't necessarily disagree or don't see the danger, don't see the benefits they themselves would accrue by changing the system. They've been trained to only see the downside. "But that's the way it's always been." and they don't see how destructive it is since it doesn't really affect them on the daily or really even much at all as they move their lives. Which is why "good men" don't get involved in helping to change things in the kinds of numbers they should. If they did, we'd have cut the head off this monster long ago, never again to rise.
We're just horning in where we don't "historically belong".
mopinko
(73,726 posts)the fear of putting all you ‘eggs’ in 1 basket, instead of broadcasting your seed was an important evolutionary trade off. i suppose it wasnt until we figured out where babies came from that it got to be a problem. but it’s been at the center of male insecurity ever since.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)but what excuse do those toxic men who don't want kids get to use?
mopinko
(73,726 posts)the old feminist theory that the problem is that we strip away the female from our boys.
maybe they do want kids, but cant trust that they are theirs?
but it still leads them to see woman as untrustworthy, but also needing to be under their control. and if they cant do that, they dont get to advance to the next round.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)Why is it we do that, do you think?
As far as viewing women untrustworthy as breeders, I kinda think that going way, way back, like pre-historic times, there wasn't really any or at least as much possessiveness of females among men, just the chemical and biological attraction. (I mean face it, even now so many of them are willing to stick it just anywhere available.) Probably took them quite a while to even figure out how a woman becomes pregnant, and then since they likely weren't exclusively partnered, it was probably attributed it to one man's seed/essence/whatever being stronger than another's. Jealousy, male egos and the competition was ON! Not hard to imagine the next step being to take possession of a certain woman for oneself.
Ohio Joe
(21,898 posts) cbabe
(6,648 posts)Evidence of v
Sheila O’Connor
Oct, 2019
Review:
In the first half of the 20th century, American girls were sentenced and imprisoned for "immorality," including O'Connor's maternal grandmother. The book weaves fact and fiction together and my knee-jerk impulse is to define it, to find the right words to categorize, and I’m resisting that reaction because this story has absolutely nothing to do with genre. That’s the wrong conversation. The right conversation is what this disturbing and secretive history says about this country’s relationship with women. An important and unforgettable read.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)but yep! What is considered as immoral where women are concerned is a passel of made up bullshit to maintain control. "OH, no real lady would behave in such a manner. What is wrong with her?"
malaise
(296,105 posts)Rec
dlk
(13,247 posts)All of the recent radical and extremist attacks on women’s autonomy have a long historical precedent. Sadly, a large group of Americans are determined to keep women a permanent second/servant class.
llmart
(17,617 posts)all I can say to this post is "Amen, Sister."
I do get discouraged by what I see in some younger women though. A lot has been done to denigrate the word "feminist" (thanks to the big blowhard Limbaugh). They refuse to identify themselves as a feminist. There seems to be somewhat of a disconnect between their real life and goals and not being able to recognize that generations of women before them couldn't even envision having those dreams and goals. I don't believe it ever occurred to me, someone who graduated at the top of my class, that I could be a doctor or lawyer or astronaut. I say that last one because my son is an engineer for NASA and he told me that there are almost as many women in the astronaut training program as there are men which delights me to no end. (And yes, he is an example of a man who is a feminist raised by a feminist.)
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but the majority of new students in law and med schools are female. Women have always been better students for the most part than men. Having worked in a law school and a university, what I saw were young women who were very serious about their futures and doing the hard work to not only get the degrees but to get the best grades. However, a lot of them still had the notion that they would find a guy who would be attracted to them and marry them. I really wished I would have heard more of them say to me, "it's not important to me to always have a man in my life."
I think there are still too many cultural messages in TV shows (bachelorette and bachelor or whatever the names of those hideous shows are), movies, music, advertising, women's magazines, that tell them they can have the fairy tale life.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)"Women getting too big for their britches, but you can't just come right out and tell them that! I know, let's resell the myth to the new ones!"
I agree about besmirching the word, feminist. I also believe there have been too many things left unsaid and undone by some of us, too, that young women can't still proudly call themselves feminist. We got content in our victories, but left the insidious, creeping issues unresolved, and for too long. Looking at the ERA and equal wages.
GeoWilliam750
(2,555 posts)Work harder, and typically do the hardest work.
Very simply, on average, women should slightly marry down (goodness, I hate Disney). The idea of women marrying up no longer has a place in our society, and women who marry slightly down seem to stay married longer - perhaps my misperception.
llmart
(17,617 posts)I'm not sure how you define "marrying up" but it used to mean marrying someone who had better financial prospects. I don't think women should marry "down" if you're talking about intelligence level. I think women should marry someone who is their intellectual equal. Even these days, there are very few men who would not be demeaned by a woman who is smarter than they are. In my day, there were very few men who would even look twice at the smart girls in class.
Wild blueberry
(8,295 posts)Thank you. Or as we used to say, "Right on, sister!"
The Jungle 1
(4,552 posts)Women did not get the vote until 1920.
If you think that women have equality then go laugh at the mirror.
The repuke court just stomped on women again.
chowmama
(1,096 posts)I got married before spousal rape became a legal term. (Not that DH would Ever...) All the financial crap. There was a reason I bought used cars from the newspaper ads. No important purchase or credit without a man's signature.
Anybody remember the high school courses required for a female to graduate? I got lucky because we moved around just right for me to escape home economics, but my sisters all had to have it. No boys were allowed, and no girls in shop class. I did get nailed for Typing. When I protested, I was informed that if I got a good job at all, it would be as a secretary, a nurse or a teacher, and that was just until I got married and started having kids. This was in front of a whole class and applied to all of us. Again, no boys were allowed. And you couldn't graduate without it. That's your future, honey, working for a man. 55 words a minute.
Even before high school, there were dress codes. Kneeling at the beginning of gym class to be certain your skirt touched the floor. This was a public school. In winter, we were allowed to wear pants under our skirts until we got to school. Otherwise, seeing our legs was required. (But only from mid-knee down.) I don't think we got to wear pants even in kindergarten. The boys found out early that there wouldn't be any repercussions for lifting the skirts to see our panties. And, of course, no jungle gym or any of the good equipment for us. We had to be ladylike. But we couldn't skip the playground and stay in the library. We had to be social.
College was to get your MRS degree (a thing my father actually said to me). He also informed me that at my job, whatever it might be, I needed to stay safe and avoid a (non-specified) danger that being alone with a male co-worker might present. However, if something did happen, I wasn't to report it. Don't object to anything the guys did. Go along to get along. The only way to stay employed was to not be a known troublemaker.
Watching the laws get made was a hoot. Our state's decision to allow a married woman to choose her own surname finally passed. The trick was calling it the "Her Father's Name" bill. You know, in case a man had no sons to carry on the family name. It took an equally long time to fund our first battered women' shelters. A legislator got up and carried on at length about how no government money was ever going to go to fund "a home for runaway wives".
My mom was a surgical tech in a human hospital. (RNs and LPNs generally didn't assist in surgery.) After the war, she went to nursing school, but stopped to work so my father could graduate from his college. I assume her check kept the household going, as his tuition was paid by his having been in the army. When he graduated, he didn't return the favor. This was standard, as the wives started having kids PDQ (no reliable birth control). Anyway, after we were grown, she went to night school while working days and got licensed as a tech. Overnight on-call shifts gave her some stories about spousal abuse. One guy was beating up his wife inside the house, then dragged her outside, propped her up against the garage door and started repeatedly running his car into her. The neighbors intervened. Mom assisted in trying to put her back together. When she came out of the anesthesia, she was still fighting for her life. She can't have weighed 90 pounds, but it took the doctor, 3 or 4 orderlies, a nurse and my mom to hold her down until she came out of it enough to realize she was safe. They could have used more, but they wouldn't fit. I can't stop wondering how many neighbors had heard the abuse from inside the house, and for how many years. How many times was he told to walk around the block until he calmed down? How many times had authorities refused to intervene in what was essentially a domestic issue?
On the plus side, the same hospital was plagued for months by an early AM serial rapist in the parking lot. (This does get better. Really.) Everybody on the early shift was told to walk in pairs, etc. Finally, a nurse showed up, walked towards the building alone and was attacked. Unfortunately for the rapist, she and her friend (who showed up 5 minutes later) both played judo. They had zero problem putting him down, keeping him down, and getting the authorities involved. The cops came back to the hospital later to inform the front desk that the guy had been completely unable to keep his mouth shut. He complained all the way downtown that he was used to raping a better class of lady. That's a direct quote.
Being a lady is highly overrated.
GeoWilliam750
(2,555 posts)Even when I was in college, we were told (in Japan) that women were fired at about the age 32 or some such, because if a man did not want them, then neither did the company - by the company spokesman.
Your list could go on for quite some time, and it is amazing how much Roe vs Wade changed things.
chowmama
(1,096 posts)Girls were trained from day one that the job was to be a nice, friendly girl. Nice required friendly. You smiled. You made people feel comfortable. And you never pissed anybody off, especially males. I was in primary school when both my parents informed me, separately, that I must never let a boy know I was smarter than they were. (I did recognize that they were tacitly admitting that I was. I was smart enough for that.) But then, as now, the world revolved around males. Our job was to be sure they didn’t get their tender fee-fees hurt. We, on the other hand, were supposed to behave as if we were incredibly delicate, while actually developing the hide and iron-clad constitution of a rhino.
In college, this came head to head with our other training – we were completely responsible for making sure that we were safe. If we made a mistake and got into a ‘bad situation’, all of the consequences came down on us. I don’t need to beat that dead horse. Everybody knows what happened – the girl lost her reputation and her schooling, the boy stayed on, and everybody understood that it was out of the question for a mere girl to ruin a nice boy’s promising future. Besides, she wouldn’t have been there if she didn’t want it. Etc., etc.
So you spent all your time in a strange dance. Let the guy know you’re worried about what he might do, and he’ll get offended. You’re not supposed to offend guys. If he wants to talk in your room, you shouldn’t say no. If something happens, you should have said no. You could get an ulcer trying to figure out which ones were safe. I swear some girls got a steady boyfriend just to get out of the dating game.
(I’m reminded of an incident at work. Somebody was just getting into dating again and doing it on-line. Some guy she hadn’t even met yet was trying to get her personal info, including where she lived, while negging her about how he was probably her last best chance, so she should put up with whatever. When she balked, he did the whole angry “So, what, you think I’m some kind of predator? Do I look like a predator to you?” She was discussing it in the lunch room and, while I normally don’t get involved, I just had to say “What difference does that make? Tell him the best predators don’t look like predators – hasn’t he ever seen a goddamned nature special?” She gasped, but laughed (and I got some agreement from the room). I believe that line actually did make it back to him. They never met. And she’s done a lot better since.)
Anyway, it was all a Catch-22. You couldn’t win. Even if you got out of it by getting a boyfriend or a husband, there was a chance that you’d judged wrong. And with a husband, you now had someone with legal power over you. Literally everything you did was a risk - work, dating, marriage. Uteruses don’t come equipped with crystal balls and sometimes life’s a goddamned nature special.
We’ve had to fight like dogs (bitches, technically) to change the laws so that we have some control over our lives. If they think we’ll stop now, they’re wrong. As a nun told a pope, “You can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube.”
GeoWilliam750
(2,555 posts)I also listen to what my mother has to say on the subject.
Very enlightening.
Martin68
(27,749 posts)I'm afraid you never answered the important question raised in your headline. I believe most of us are already fully acquainted with the ill effects of masculine toxicity. Even men are victims of toxically masculine men. Is it caused by the way parents raise their children? Is it built into the process of socialization? Is it a product of our schools? Is it the fault of advertising? Is it an inevitable result of testosterone? Is it due to movies and TV? The media? Political persuasion? Religion?
All of the above? If so, how do we go about changing the way boys are raised so that they do not become toxic men? If this is a serious problem, and I don't doubt that it is, how do we solve this problem as a democracy and an enlightened society?
soldierant
(9,354 posts)
GeoWilliam750
(2,555 posts)Although they might not completely understand it.
Lithos
(26,638 posts)Very well said, thank you!
Would you say some of this is due to the insecurity of some men? I know fear is a great motivator in why some try and force a particular order.
BigmanPigman
(55,137 posts)The more things change, the more they stay the same. Thousands of years of male dominated religions, cultures, and societies isn't going to change. Men know they have it good and they aim to stay that way. They are going to hold on to every last shred of power and control by any means possible.
love_katz
(3,261 posts)A full exposition would run to many pages in length. Most of masculine toxic behavior seems to continue because our society supports it through its laws and social structure. Patriarchal religions provide a huge amount of support and excuse making through their doctrines. We are not educated about societies that were based on equality, with the contributions of each sex equally valued. For example, the confederation of the First Nations tribes of the northeastern United States have a very different social structure than the patriarchal values and ideas that the first emigrants from Europe brought with them. Orren Lyons of the Iroquois confederacy said in a number of YouTube talks that his ancestors counseled the Founding Fathers that they needed to include their women in their government. He says that they didn't listen, and that's a big reason why we're in the mess that we are in. The history of Europe is one of constant wars and invasions. The invading Romans did everything that they could to destroy the Tribes of Europe, and to enslave the people after they had conquered them. The Romans worked particularly hard at destroying the spiritual beliefs and practices of the people that they conquered, because those beliefs and the laws and customs gave the people the strength to resist and fight back against the invading Romans. Queen Bodicca of the Iceni tribe defeated an entire Roman legion and burned their trading post, early London, to the ground. For some further reading, check out the book "The Chalice and the Blade", by Rianne Eisler. Another great source, about the dislocations caused by the change over from a mostly agrarian society in the Middle Ages, to a society based on commerce and enclosure of the common lands, is "Dreaming the Dark: Magic, Sex, and Politics", by Starhawk. The appendix is the section with the most concentrated information about how life changed, especially for women and anyone who didn't own land. I also read an article, in an old copy of Mother Earth News, where the author discussed his theory that, at least in some parts of Africa, that climate change helped fuel the change from egalitarian society to patriarchy. I guess that my main point is that patriarchy is neither natural nor inevitable. I have piles of books and articles that have shown me otherwise. Even in the area of bodily strength, I would point out that women are not encouraged to work at becoming our fittest and strongest selves. Women are also not taught to ask ourselves if we really want to get married, and if so, why? We are taught that inequality in society is inevitable and are not taught that a better way of doing things is possible and that we will all benefit by creating that better society, even if nothing like it has existed in a large society in modern times. I think we can learn from the First Nations people of our land. Humans face an enormous amount of challenges in the future, with the negative effects of climate change already crashing down on many areas of the world. The greatest and most lasting achievements of humanity involved collective effort, sometimes spanning over a thousand years. We will not be helped in dealing with the challenges of our times if too many segments of our people are hamstrung by oppression and injustice. Those of us who want a decent future, with a healthy functioning Earth, are going to have to forge ahead. The fundy fanatics and resentful incels can either figure it out and get on board, or they can get left behind. Too many of them are worrying about losing their privileges and failing to see what they will gain in a society built on real equality and justice. They are also not seeing that no one will gain anything if the life support systems on this planet cease to be able to support life as we know it.
betsuni
(29,078 posts)Scrivener7
(59,522 posts)it gave me 2 new books for my queue and it's full of people agreeing but also allowing disagreement without attempts to silence it.
Thank you for this!
no_hypocrisy
(54,906 posts)He had poor judgment and expected me to capitulate to his authority. I knew better (from a toddler) and challenged him.
Dad “diagnosed” me with ODD, oppositional defiant disorder to justify his cruel retributions. And as he was a physician, my perpetual fear was twofold: 1) He’d commit me to an institution where I’d be forcefed pharmaceuticals, and/or 2) He’d arrange for me to get a lobotomy.
I’m not kidding. These were not baseless fears.
My siblings were in fear of him too, but they never stood up to him like I did.
hippywife
(22,777 posts)My dad was abusive, but I never had to face those kinds of fears. I'm sorry you had did.
no_hypocrisy
(54,906 posts)destroy me.
Marthe48
(23,175 posts)I read it when it was a bestseller, and have never let down my guard.
My husband was a good person, and we had a wonderful marriage. He worked at an aluminum rolling mill. He came home one day and said one of his older coworkers blamed women's lib on power steering in cars. We both thought it was a reach :/ But even now, 40 years later, it is what women contend with.
I often think of all of the work women do in their homelife, and then add to it, working outside the home. I have cookbooks from the 1800's and part of both of the books are sections for home nursing, making and dying cloth, dressing game, making household cleaning chemicals, and other unimaginable tasks.
Some men think when they marry, they are getting a slave. No women should accept servitude as a condition for living.
LymphocyteLover
(9,847 posts)LymphocyteLover
(9,847 posts)I don't know how to change this thinking. Of course conservatives and their ideology is all about this and it needs to be pushed back with all our power
Marthe48
(23,175 posts)Some are obvious, some are insidious. If we want to change our outlook, all of us have to find a way to avoid passing along the pitfalls that are either built in, or taught.
It is fine for anyone to be mechanically inclined, as long as they want to be. It is fine for anyone to cook, if they want. There are all kinds of odd couples who pair up. They respect the differences and celebrate what they share. It takes patience, attention and a desire for harmony.
Bucky
(55,334 posts)Each shooter, each misogynist, has a different pathology driving their violent or abusive impulses. A sweeping statement like "men lost control over women and so many of them turn into abusers" is close, but is not quite depicting the dynamic accurately. There are, after all, plenty of men who do have power over "their" women. Some of them turn into shooters as well. The mythology of the American mass shooter is that it's the victims of the times lashing out at the modern world. The reality has always been that most mass shooters (and most interpersonal abusers using other means) are successful bullies, successful abusers & controllers who are simply upping their game, taking the abuse to a new level.
Such men aren't lashing out at women cause they've "lost control" of them. There are as many different motivations and pathologies as there are outlashers. Many are lashing out because they feel entitled to, because there is ongoing social messaging that it's okay to abuse, that it's an expression of manliness that they have already tasted & practiced. "They kick dogs before they kick lovers," a detective who specialized in family violence cases once told me. So women standing up for themselves, society messaging that women should stand up for themselves, or women being "unruly" as you put it, isn't really the catalyst for domestic violence or domestic terrorism. It's the start of the cure for it.
GeoWilliam750
(2,555 posts)One of the truly fascinating subjects is that the modern human brain is about 15-20% smaller than that of the Cro-Magnon man, and about the same as the Neanderthal.
Truly fascinating reading, as is the study of other extinct Africans, besides Neanderthals, Denisovans, and the Hobbit group that died in SE Asia a couple of tens of thousands of years ago.