Men are capable of better

[Taverner]

[rrneck]

1. I guess we should be thankful

that we have feminists to set the standard for us.

[Taverner]

2. Missed. Point. Completely.

Why be the product of some other man's idea of what you should be?

That's ALL this is asking.

Please, I know you. You're smarter than that.

[Warren DeMontague]

4. *What* is asking? Some bumper-sticker blurb someone did in photoshop?

Why is there an assumption that people in this group need that advice, or that they are "the product of some other man's idea of what (they) should be" .... where's this coming from?

Frankly, it sounds a tad presumptuous.

[Taverner]

5. By that logic any sentence could be reduced - reducto ad absurdum

All this is saying is that this idea of man-brute has been hoisted upon us since day one. I choose not to be that.

[Warren DeMontague]

7. And so do I.

I'm wondering why this was posted here, though. Are there some man-brutes you're aware of that you thought might benefit from that advice? Since 'deconstructing' things is all the rage, maybe we can deconstruct the unspoken subtext of your OP.

[socialsecurityisAAA]

12. Since day one? Do you mean historically or in modern times.

Many early hunter gatherer and again cultures were collectivist matriarchies. I think one , a nomadic peoples, survived to modern times. I forget the name, but I can check my textbooks and find out.

[opiate69]

8. Ah, so....

Instead of being "the product of some other man's idea of what I should be", I should be the product of some womens' idea of what I should be..

Nah.. I think I'll just stick to being what I think I should be.

[Warren DeMontague]

9. If I see this Pat R. Iarchy guy, I'll tell him what the fuck for.

He sounds like an idiot. But I don't think he's a real guy.

[opiate69]

10. I heard he was Keyser Söze's cousin!

[Warren DeMontague]

11. You only say that because you're known to be one of the

"Usual Suspects"

[opiate69]

14. Verbal Kint, at yout service.

[Warren DeMontague]

15. I'm glad to see Kevin Spacey getting back to playing dark and immoral.

his "pay it forward", "K Pax" era was insufferable.

[opiate69]

16. Dammit... I need to remember to reinstate my Netflix acct..

Been wanting to see that.. plus, Arrested Development returns this weekend IIRC.

[Warren DeMontague]

17. Yeah, streaming alone is only like 8 bucks a month or something.

We dropped the DVDs because theyd sit unwatched forever. My wife has this thing where she refuses to start a movie unless she can see the whole thing.

house of cards is not bad. I'm about 8 episodes in, now. Gonna be all over Arrested Development, too.

[opiate69]

18. Yeah.. we used to have Netflix and Hulu...

Then Xfinity talked me into a cable package, so the wife cancelled Netflix and Hulu, and then Xfinity tried to charge me a shitbucket of money which the original sales rep told me I wasn't supposed to be charged, but the accounting department wouldnt budge so I dropped them and switched to Century Link for internet.. just keep forgetting to turn Netflix back on lol.

[Major Nikon]

26. It's well worth watching

I'm up to episode 9, I think. Not only is it good drama, it's raw meat for political junkies.

[Gore1FL]

13. How am I the product of some other man's idea of what I should be?

The question is based on a false premise.

[Taverner]

19. Easily. You bought that man's bullshit

Drop the individual


And you drop his illusion

[Warren DeMontague]

20. And you don't see anything presumptuous about that statement?

How do you know precisely what bullshit anyone here has or hasn't bought?

[opiate69]

24. Whoa dude.. I think I better dig out the old bong for this...

[Inkfreak]

33. No need. I'm fairly stoned & it's a mystery to me.

[Taverner]

35. Let's talk then. Tell me everything you have a problem with.

I will listen.

Something no one ever offers, but is desperately needed....

[ElboRuum]

37. I have a distinct problem...

...with the idea that there is a problem. There simply must be.

It's assumed. It's required.

What if there was no problem to be solved? No behavioral disorder to be corrected? No existential crisis to be parsed, processed, weighed, and measured? What if, and I'm just spitballing here, 'the kids are alright?'

In such a context, what does your OP even mean? What if what is simply is? What if there was an opportunity for moral, philosophical, and/or emotional consternation and nobody came?

[Taverner]

34. I am more than happy to bring out a bong, provide the material...

....and discuss this.

With ANYONE!

Seriously!

[Warren DeMontague]

62. OK: You take a hit and I say "The thing is, it's Floozflatz that gives you the bunions on your feet!

Wagashugga is your friend, it will help you get RID of your pesky bunions!"

So what do you say? Do you say (cough cough) "ohhhh, thank you! thank you! thank you!"

No, you probably say something like this:

Define Floozflatz.

Define Wagashugga.

And oh, by the way, I don't have bunions.

[Gore1FL]

39. What man?

Which individual? What illusion?

[Major Nikon]

41. So please tell us what the point is exactly

First off, your subject line "men can do better" is a bit ambiguous. Everyone is capable of better. By saying men can do better you seem to suggest that women are exempt from the need for self improvement. At best, this statement is cliche'. At worst, it's simply taking a stab at men by reminding them that they are substandard compared to women.

In the first sentence of this post you substitute, "man" for patriarchy, as if both of those things are synonymous. This is the mistake that many feminists also make (for many of them it's intentional, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you don't know any better).

Next you seem to suggest that anyone would want to be defined as animalistic, stupid, and monolithic in the first place and that we should bow at the knees of feminism and thank it for trying to make us "better". This is possibly the most ridiculous part (although the rest certainly comes close). More than a few feminists, including many right here on DU, continually remind us that most, if not nearly all men embody the image of what you think feminism is working to spare us from. In other words, they are working to reinforce that image, and their idea of making us "better" includes lecturing us from their platform of high and mightiness.

Feminism itself is hardly monolithic. The only thing all feminists really have in common is they are social activists who campaign for the rights of women. Anyone who posits that the whole of feminism is anything beyond that is simply pulling it out of their ass with predictable results. It's not the purpose or intent of feminism to make men "better". Anyone who claims as much is not speaking for all of feminism and shouldn't pretend to do so.

[lumberjack_jeff]

45. +1 n/t

[rrneck]

47. How would you feel if the graphic said

"Catholicism holds that men are capable of more..."? Or Protestantism, or capitalism, or communism, or libertarianism or any of the other plethora of "isms" out there?

Feminism is just another religion. Like any religion it has done great things and it has come up with some pretty foolish notions as well. It all depends on which feminist you ask. "Patriarchy" is just another name for Satan, evil, and all else that is bad in the hearts of mankind that can be applied to the male gender. It is a free floating demon that is useful for group cohesion.

There is no feminist ethics. There is only ethics. So feminism is in no more position to declare its moral superiority, and by extension the moral shortcomings of any other gender, than any other religion. I don't really know what future feminism may have, but for now it's starting to look like its primary function is to keep professional feminists in business.

[Behind the Aegis]

48. Give that man a kewpie doll!

[Warren DeMontague]

3. Does "Patriarchy" have a radio station? Is there a mailing address for "Feminism"?

Because what I see, there, are two labels that are slapped on shit willy-nilly. Some people spend all sorts of time grousing or promoting or worshipping or yowling at their fucking labels as if they're a truck that won't start, or their cousin Al.

It's like "God", particularly as presented by some 12 steppers-- well, it doesn't matter that no one agrees on what the word actually means, you just need to belieeeeeeeeeeeeve!


They are ABSTRACTIONS which may or may not be useful at any given time. Please don't ascribe objective "reality" to them. I will accept broad assertions about "Patriarchy" what "Feminism holds" as soon as someone can point me in the direction of them and comes up with a widely accepted definition for what they're supposed to represent.

[galileoreloaded]

6. ill define the men around me and my own gender role without

terms like "patriarchy" and "misogyny", but thanks. i find those words get tossed out when an argument has been lost and there is nothing left but sacrificing before the altar of the law of assertions.

[Upton]

21. What a bunch of garbage..

I just can't stop myself from harassing and assaulting because of the "patriarchy"...

I'll choose for myself what is to be a man. I don't need some feminist defining it for me.

[Taverner]

22. Fine. Make no point to change

Change is the enemy of progression, dontchyaknow

[Upton]

23. Change to what?

I'm perfectly happy in my own skin. I assume you are as well. What's your problem other than you've bought the convenient blame everything on the "patriarchy" routine.. hook, line and sinker?

[Warren DeMontague]

60. You're obviously some knuckle dragging troglodyte who needs to be dragged into the 21st century

I mean, I've never met you, of course.... but I'm just gonna throw that out there.

[Upton]

68. I guess I'm just a "man-brute" ..

Here I am contemplating how silly the OP is, just before I go out and hunt sabre tooth tigers..

[Gore1FL]

40. I change when I get new information

Life is about understanding. At least mine is.

I'm not sure what actual information the graphic is providing, or what means data was collected to come to the stated conclusions. Provide that, and I will be more inclined to add it to the theories I live my life by.

I don't recall me fitting into the stereotype suggested.

[Warren DeMontague]

59. You hacked into my netcam, didn't you.

Otherwise HOW would you know so much about me????????

[ElboRuum]

67. Change?

Change how?

Should I change on basis of one person's statement?
If so, change into what?
Should I examine the ramifications of that change or simply proceed blindly?
Should I examine the beneficence or harm of that change or should I just assume it's good because, well change. CHAAAANNNGGGE!
Should I avoid the obvious questions? Avoid skepticism?

[Warren Stupidity]

25. I see this went about as expected.

Hackles on stun!

[opiate69]

27. As expected?

What, did a gaggle of you get together and figure "let`s stir some shit up in the men`s group for the holiday weekend" and draw straws to see who would do it?

[Warren Stupidity]

28. wow and paranoid too.

yes that is exactly how it went down. How astute. We've been caught red handed.

[Taverner]

29. Seriously - at this point in history...

You don't think there is a concerted war on women?

Really?

PM me if you think other...

[Gore1FL]

42. Obviously, there is

By christians, sure.
By republicans, youbetcha.


By me? Nope. Sorry. I am not an anti-woman combatant. In fact, I've been known to fight on the side of women.

[Taverner]

43. It goes beyond you

The stereotype of brute force dude v penelope pitstop still exists

Break it down

[Gore1FL]

49. I break it down every day when I don't participate in the behaviors described.

I break it down every day when I don't subscribe to stereotypes of masculinity and feminism.
I break it down every day when I choose investigation over outrage.
I break it down every day when I don't allow myself to be pigeonholed at all, much less incorrectly.

I am a fucking decent human being. So are most people, both male and female. I don't need the lense of femininity to improve upon it, nor does some undefined force of "patriarchy" have the power thwart it.

Instead of simply employing platitudes, vague references, and what can only be described as a flame bait graphic with no other comment, perhaps you should sum up some specific problems you'd like to see addressed and perhaps even ask for or suggest solutions.

[Bonobo]

55. That's an excellent suggestion and in fact

I would welcome it.

It is the difference between constructive and destructive. Or perhaps thinking and reflexively posting.

[Warren DeMontague]

57. "don't think there is a concerted war on women".... Did someone actually say that?

Or is that the latest straw man justification for the thread?

Where in the 2 inch square image that comprises the OP is there anything about a war on women? Does anyone in this group think there isn't a war on women? Does anyone here NOT oppose the GOP's assault on reproductive freedom? Rush's asinine attacks on Sandra Fluke? Of course there's a war on women, and it's being driven by the Religious Right and their allies.

Perhaps that is where you should be focusing your ire.

[Major Nikon]

63. So you've enlisted in the fight by lobbing a grenade into the men's group...

Perhaps so you can be labeled a hero of the cause by certain individuals.

If that is your motivation, you're off to a great start. The only thing missing is a self-delete of the OP.

[Warren Stupidity]

65. no i don't think you and i got together and plotted your op.

which is what the person I responded to implied.

[Warren DeMontague]

61. There are a whole host of implied assumptions behind the OP and the thread.

I mean, defend them, explain them, argue for them... but you're a smart guy; don't pretend like they're not there.

[Warren Stupidity]

66. the responses to the op are a sorry mess of denial and defensive poutrage.

the op itself states that our patriarchal culture harms all of us, but the regulars here can't even manage to agree that there just might be some truth in that.

[Major Nikon]

69. Actually many of the regulars here have written lengthy posts on what you think we can't agree on

And I don't remember any such disagreements. Perhaps if you could provide links to relevant threads, I might be more convinced, but I don't think you're going to find too many, unless you count the shit stirrers as regulars.

As far as defensive poutrage goes, there's another group on DU that we are constantly reminded has considerably more traffic which might as well have a bullet point in their mission statement on the subject. It seems curious that you're not so quick to call out that behavior over there, and seem to encourage it whenever possible. Even if your charge was valid, it seems your standards change when you venture over to the dark side. Quite telling that.

Just sayin'

[Gore1FL]

70. That's not the issue

I am not sure that a sliver-of-truth wrapped fallacy and served in a flamebait gravy over a bed of unspecificity really requires or deserves a focus on the sliver-of-truth part of it. It's not our job to sift through a pile of feces to find what might be edible.

If I posted a graphic that read:

"2+2=4
Jews are bad for themselves.
Christians know what's better for Jews."

and I provided no further commentary, in the original post, and only followed it up with platitudes, would you take the time to defend the 2+2=4 part and express disbelief that no one could "manage to agree that there just might be some truth in that"?

The purpose of the graphic was not to provide deep introspection, but to be divisive.

[lumberjack_jeff]

73. Certainly patriarchy is harmful.

But the laundry list of sexist stereotypes of men provided in the OP have little to do with patriarchy.

Patriarchy is going to work in the coal mine at age 17 and dying at age 45 so that your daughters will go to college... while expecting your sons to go to into the coal mines just like you; because it's better to be a dead MAN than a dependent.

[galileoreloaded]

78. this post illicits quite a bit of respect from me to you.

thank you.

[Warren DeMontague]

74. You have to explain the op by putting in stuff that isn't there- isn't that a red flag?

Last edited Sat May 25, 2013, 05:00 PM - Edit history (1)

There's nothing about "patriarchal culture". There is, of course, "patriarchy". Okay, which "Patriarchy"? The one which supposedly creates armies of transgender gynergy vampires to infiltrate womynspace?

Most people here- me, at least- acknowledge that Western Civilization has a historically patriarchal orientation. Of course. But "Patriarchy" as a label is used for all sorts of things. And these fights over the labels are really the fucking definition of pointlessness. The labels are abstractions to categorize a set of data points. It's like arguing over whether the big dipper "really" exists. The stars that make up the big dipper exist, but the big dipper is a pattern which can or cannot be abstracted from the information.



It's like, "it's a face! No, it's a vase, you vase-denier youuuuu!"

And in that vein, which "Feminism"? The one which believes women should have equal rights? The one which supports reproductive freedom? The banner under which I marched in DC in 2004? Because everyone here already agrees with that. The, dare I say it, sex positive wing? Yeah, that too. Or the "Feminism" of Dworkin and MacKinnon, the wing which has no problem palling up with the likes of Ed Meese?

Again, define the terms.

And there is the way the material is presented in the first place: "The Thing Is"--- it walks in assuming you're wrong, I'm right, and I'm gonna set you straight. Right off the bat.

Oh, can't imagine why anyone might object.

[Major Nikon]

75. Gee, they are just trying to make you better

Even if they aren't receptive to reciprocation.

Makes perfect sense.

[Upton]

31. Just a couple members of the collective guilt crowd..

keeping tabs to make sure we acknowledge our male privilege.

I know, in my case, they're going to have a mighty long wait..

[Bonobo]

54. Warren.

Seriously, if you have no reason to come here other than to criticize the group and members, I don't think you should come.

If you have a point to make, please feel free to do so. But I will not continue to allow you to just come here for the sole purpose of heckling.

[Inkfreak]

30. Meh. Reads like a shitty bumper sticker. n/t

[Taverner]

32. PM me if you want to go deeper n/t

[ElboRuum]

38. I don't understand why you want to take this offline...

Here's just as good a place to discuss this as any.

[Bonobo]

56. It does seem strange to make an OP

and then not discuss any detailed issues, to speak in platitudes and then to offer to talk offline for a "deeper" discussion.

[ElboRuum]

64. Implication...

By keeping this out in the open, it invites discussion that he/she/it will not be able to opine without potential for rebuttal. Given the flimsiness of the original post (yeah, it's an internet tchotchke, with all of the depth of a parking lot puddle), I'd be hesitant to discuss its "wisdom" out in the open as well.

[Bonobo]

71. And rather pathetically, the other attack dog

in this thread can do nothing to elaborate on wgat we are talking about nor address any of the substantive responses to the paper-thin OP.

Just more restating of platitudes with no substance and personal attacks.

[Major Nikon]

76. Internet memes are the modern form of shitty bumper stickers

Developed by and for those who see benefit to sloganeering vs rational discussion.

[Warren DeMontague]

77. The one in my sig is funny

I don't usually go in for teh kittehs, but what the hell.

[Bonobo]

36. "Patriarchy" cannot say anything.

To the extent that "patriarchy" has meaning, it is a broad abstraction meant to convey the idea that men have more power in determining the shape of the society and culture than women. They have more entrenched power.
This may be true, but I would balance that by saying that women have more influence with children and in sexual politics, so it may in fact be a wash, but let's put that aside for a minute.

What I really want to say is that the "Patriarchy" cannot "say" anything since it is just an abstraction. A culture consists of many voices. A culture is the sum total of everything happening in a society so there are literally a multitude of voices. Who you choose to listen to is now, more than ever, up to you.

[lumberjack_jeff]

44. Definitions; Ideally they should have some relationship to the thing they're referring to.

Patriarchy: Literally "rule of the father" was invented as a mechanism to protect women and children. It is based on the idea that women are childlike and require governance, yet are comparatively precious. It involves strict discipline and the expectation of self sacrifice to protect the family members. A protector who was "stupid" and "incapable" and "subject to animalistic instincts" would be fundamentally incapable of executing his duties in a patriarchal framework.

It's also hard to reconcile that the patriarchy expects men to act only on instinct with the most basic parts of our reptilian brains, while simultaneously expecting us to experience the world in a very carefully defined set of ways.

I think the definitions are backwards. The bumbling, undisciplined idiot paradigm is relatively new and is an outgrowth of a society that considers dads to be an anachronism.

Feminism on the other hand, is simply advocacy for women. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the betterment of men - except to the extent that "better" men make women's lives easier.

Together, the post is gibberish.

The reason that men are four or five times more likely to commit suicide is because all of the expectations of the patriarchy upon men (self restraint, protection, role modeling, responsibility, and providing for the family) are fully intact without any of the benefits of social protection.

[Hayabusa]

46. Is there anything the patriarchy can't be blamed for?

I know that sounds a bit snarky, but yeah.

[Gore1FL]

50. I blame the patriarchy for the patriarchy. n/t

[hrmjustin]

51. We are all capable of better!

[Taverner]

52. Amen - my friend

We ALL are

[hrmjustin]

53. .

[Warren DeMontague]

58. A good place to start would be defining our terms and being transparent about our motives.

Of course, remember what "Einstein" said about the definition of insanity.

[HuskiesHowls]

72. Problem is: Feminism is only about women, not helping men.

The feminism you speak of is about subjugating men, not helping them. That won't help society in any way, shape, or form. And the problem is not just patriarchy, its about society.

Patriarchy is a societal system, that involves men and women to keep it working. Allan Johnson, in Patriarchy, The System writes "It (patriarchy) is a system, which means it can't be reduced to the people who participate in it." http://www.umass.edu/wost/syllabi/spring06/johnson.pdf It is society, as a whole, all of us, that needs to change.

You make it sound like patriarchy defines men, and makes us less than we can be. I don't agree with that. And, unfortunately, the way it is stated, it attempts to define the masculine in the process. No. What that defines are what I would call trolls, or ogres. Masculinity, and men are SO much more than what is described.

A much better description is brought forth by Marion Woodman in an interview with EnlightenNext magazine. In it she states " I don't think "patriarchy" and "masculinity" are synonymous. I think that the patriarchy has become identified with power, and that as such it kills the masculine just as much as it kills the feminine. " http://www.enlightennext.org/magazine/j16/woodman.asp?page=2 (A brief biography and comments about her are on page 1 of the article: http://www.enlightennext.org/magazine/j16/woodman.asp)

As such, No, "Men are capable of better" is not right. A better, less antagonistic, more encompassing title would have been "Society is capable of better". And replacing the words "Patriarchy" and "Feminism" with "Society" would help a lot!

[nomorenomore08]

79. I disagree that feminism is "only about [helping] women."

But I agree that "masculinity" and "patriarchy" are not synonymous, and that "masculinity" has positive as well as negative potential. To feel guilt or shame merely on account of one's maleness, is at the very least to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

[nomorenomore08]

80. I understand what you're saying. But I also understand some of the responses.

I think every man - and here I speak specifically of men, males - has a degree of insecurity RE: himself and his place in the world. I know I certainly do, as a man. And when it comes to placing blame, pointing the finger if you will, the male feminists will blame "patriarchy," the MRA's will blame "misandry," and the rest of us, probably some gray area between the two.

For the record, I don't think any of us are totally right or wrong, or maybe, we're all wrong in our own ways. I myself have no definitive solutions for what collectively ails us. But unlike some, I would never claim that there's no problem to begin with - one has only to read the headlines every day, to perceive that something is seriously amiss in the world.

[Taverner]

81. This is true

There's a book, "Stiffed" - by Faludi that addresses this