Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

FEMINISTS - Slut shaming actually harms men and benefits women,

Scroll to see replies

oh really? Look at Elliot Rodger, there are millions of guys like that, shamed because they are virgins.

No one was or at least should not be shaming him because he was a virgin, who cares? They were shaming him because he was a nihilistic , pretentious tw*t who willingly killed innocent people.

Reply 41

scrotgrot

Original post by serenajade

Honestly, the fact that men feel the need to do that is - and I know people hate it when feminists use this word - but, due to patriarchal standards enforced on men.

Why shouldn't men talk about feelings? Because that's 'feminine'. That sort of rubbish is saying that men can't do things because they're too 'girly', which is somehow beneath them? Ugh.

I do definitely pity guys who feel like they can't talk to their friends because they'll be mocked, it's awful and I do hope that it'll eventually go away. Gradually, things are getting better, but not fast enough. There's a lot of pressure put on men to be 'masculine'. Which is daft.

Do women have to deal with more sexism than men? Yes. Does that mean that there are no gender-based prejudices towards men? Hell no.

I don't like the word "patriarchy" at all nor the suggestion that it's enforced from above as if by some vengeful god. And I'm not sure I quite buy the idea that it's because "feminine" things are seen as inferior ways to be, just unsuitable ways to be for a man. But I have a dream that one day men and women will actually be able to talk about these issues rather than sniping at each other when the other says something "wrong". It's a real shame because as you say they are basically trying to talk about the same thing.

I don't see it as patriarchy personally, I see it as because of the demographic changes that have taken place in the Western world. Medical advances and contraception mean we don't have to pump out and keep 8 kids. Housework is no longer a full-time job. This is new stuff. Before, men and women had pretty well defined roles because jobs involved things like hauling hods of coal around, so obviously the men had to do that. Working-class women did work if the family needed the money but somehow they managed to do the gruelling housework and control the kids. Both were being oppressed and pushed into particular roles which had to be based on gender because only the man could do the hod-carrying. The family unit was everything.

Then the NHS and the washing machine and the post-war middle class happened. So women experienced what men are experiencing now as a result of the decline of traditional manufacturing jobs - they were now redundant in terms of their previous gender role. So they dealt with it by (re)inventing feminism, getting in on the burgeoning civil rights movement and agitating for their rights, not electoral this time but social, workplace and reproductive.

So women emancipated themselves from a gender role which had been cast into irrelevance by the post-war changes. They did this on an individual level because it made sense for the family, just as it had made sense before the war for them to have a pretty rigidly defined gender role. But men's gender role persisted until the economy rebalanced into services (which women have always done, even way back before the war all shop assistants were women, for example). That happened during the 1980s and so men haven't really got around to emancipating themselves, or we are seeing now some of the throes of that process. I suppose the lad culture of the 1990s was the first "wave".

I think this is a sound explanation for all that's gone on in the past century without once appealing to patriarchy. As ever, the only action from the top was the eternal story of powerful elements kept the working and middle classes down, so they organised their lives around gender roles when it was economically necessary for them to do so.

Sorry for wall of text/off-topic

Reply 42

scrotgrot

Original post by interact

Men only act like desperate dogs until about 21/22, latest. After that, men get better looking and women uglier, by 40s we are the kings of the universe.

Also any man can get a women if you just ignore them, they get very thirsty when you ignore them for some weird reason.

Yep, that's what I've found too :smile:

Reply 43

Dark Horse

Original post by serenajade

I have this radical belief that human beings are allowed to express emotion, so I'd deal with it. Many female friends come 'crying to me' and 'moan about their problems'. Male friends can too.

People who claim that men can't show any 'weakness' are disrespectful to others.

Lol of course they can. :lol:

Reply 44

meowoof

The idea of anyone, male or female, chaste or promiscuous truly 'benefiting' from others' analysis of their sex lives (be it slut-shaming or anything else) seems contrived. And I would also point out that in an urban, socially mobile setting any 'twenty-something', regardless of gender, being a virgin attracts some social stigma, it is not a prejudice directed soley at men.

The constructive way to deal with this issue is not to label a 'more injured party', but to deal more generally with the heavy culture of introspection into others' sex lives and to encourage people to realise that, infact, other people's sexual behaviour is really none of your business, and that a person's personality is not contingent on their ability to conform to 'acceptable' sexual behaviour.

Reply 45

browndruidess

Original post by Smokestack

Yeah I completely agree, it just shows how feminism doesn't focus on men, only on women even when there are issues regarding men to be addressed, they blame and demonize men, who also suffer from gender inequality.

Except one of the primary points second-wave feminists, from Audre Lorde to bell Hooks and Yuri Kochiyama, have recognized is the suffering rigid patriarchy causes boys and men. The TL;DR version of such feminist thought is simple; Patriarchy enforces strict gender roles. Anyone, male or female, that does not conform to these societal expectations is subject to ridicule, violence and aggression. So a man who is a virgin is as 'unmanly'. A woman who is sexually experiences is 'unwomanly'. Feminism, at its course, strives for the equality of the sexes. Inequality that affects men nearly always stems from enforced gender roles, so naturally feminism should, and HAS addressed it. Unless you willingly skipped that chapter :smile:

Reply 46

Smokestack

Original post by browndruidess

its not patriarchy its matriarchy, as its overlooking problems faced by men. Stop trying to blame men for everything

Reply 47

browndruidess

Original post by Smokestack

its not patriarchy its matriarchy, as its overlooking problems faced by men. Stop trying to blame men for everything

I'm not blaming men, I'm blaming patriarchy. Patriarchy is what made that Eliot guy decide his life wasn't worth living and what killed those defenceless men and women. You have a right to criticise feminism.....when you actually study it and recognize the intricate differences between different types of feminism. Patriarchy is a constant; it subjugates men and women in different ways. Feminism can be radical, liberal, conservative, man-hating, male-inclusive, heterosexual, lesbian, black, white, working class, upper class, Eastern, Western etc.....

If all you associate it with is bra-burning entitled armpit-hair waving Germaine Greers, then you don't really know much about it. Just clear your mind and you will see.

Reply 48

BornToBeWilde

Original post by Smokestack

how many girls go on violent rampages after being slut shamed? men who are virgin shamed are silent sufferers

Silent Sufferers?
Silent Sufferers?

Elliot Rogers was a silent sufferer even though he killed six people?He wasn't "virgin shamed" he was exacting what he saw as vengeance on women because he felt they owed him sexual contact. His suffering was not virgin shaming as you call it it was not being given, in his eyes, what he was owed. And that gave him the right to exact vengeance on people by LITERALLY MURDERING THEM. And your sympathies rest with him? Slut shaming is a huge part of rape culture that is used to oppress women by dehumanizing them. Looking down on men because they're virgins may hurt someone's feelings but the idea of being shamed for not having sex has NEVER BEEN USED TO OPPRESS MEN. Another key difference is the simple fact that slut shaming is so much more prominent because women are expected to be completely open about their sex lives. It's a private thing for men, and men are not expected to be vocal about how many sexual partners they have had. Women are expected to be completely open about it.

The concept of privelige gets tossed around a lot and you're showing a fragrant disregard for yours. It's actually a good illustration of it.

A man who is a virgin is at worst, the butt of a few jokes.
A woman who is promiscuous is outcasted, oppressed and dehumanized.