You mean the war supported by the then female Secretary of State and by the current female candidate for President?
Precisely my point. See the post immediately above yours.
Why is this thread back to focusing on women? The original post highlighted a learning program started by 5 men dealing with the topic of masculinity. Women are not involved except that the Women’s Center is “hosting” by allowing them to use their space.
What I find interesting is that a quick google search reveals that most of the men appear to be very mainstream – the quintessential “guy’s guys.” Two athletes among the group and another who bought a bus from Craigslist and spent the summer traveling the country with his buddies (http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2016/02/three-students-seek-to-expand-travels-after-cross-country-bus-trip). Another spent the summer working on a dude ranch. All seem to have some degree of political savvy and appear to be very involved in campus life.
So I am not sure what all that means but maybe it’s good. So I am in the camp of “why not?” Men who are interested go and those who aren’t simply ignore it. Funny thing is that on this thread it is more women than men weighing in with their thoughts. IMO the men’s thoughts about such a program would be pretty relevant here.
This description of the program from the school newspaper gave me better insight than the one is the OP:
And I loved this:
(emphasis mine)
I guess I never saw women leading their countries as being automatically dovish. Golda Meir certainly wasn’t. Neither was Margaret Thatcher, or Indira Gandhi.I wouldn’t expect a President Hillary Clinton to be either.
Is there a course on toxic femininity?
Seriously? Read the thread. Asked and answered.
I think the course is a good idea. The “bros” that would be best served by this won’t touch it though.
BTW- winking and nodding at dudes calling each other “homo” is BS. I don’t care how old they are, they need to understand that this is not an acceptable insult/term to use
Maybe, the “bros” won’t touch it, but the more stuff like this occurs, the more it will be normalized. Feminist ally men and anti-misogynists becoming visible is a good thing, imo.
[An interesting, short piece](Why Manning Up Is the Worst Thing to Do - YES! Magazine Solutions Journalism) about changing masculinity:
Hmmm, I’ve not noticed a lack of intimacy, caregiving or nurturing in general with males. There will always be outliers…women who hate men, men who hate women and a whole bunch clustered in the middle somewhere who identify strongly as female or strongly as male with all the social signaling. I don’t think we have had “traditional” masculinity and “traditional” femininity since prior to World War II frankly except in chick flick and Disney movies.
“I don’t think we have had “traditional” masculinity and “traditional” femininity since prior to World War II”
I live in a different America. Mad Men had a lot of truth in it. My mother had to hide that she was married, and later that she was pregnant, from med schools in the '60s. There’s plenty of sexism still around today, too. That’s all about traditional masculinity and femininity.
No kidding. The idea of people stepping out of their traditional male/female roles is more than some modern adults can handle. At my friend’s wedding, a lot of her family couldn’t get their heads around the fact that her bridal party had a guy in it. Like literally could not comprehend the idea that a woman could have a close male friend that she wanted to have supporting her marriage.
^^Don’t think for one minute that I don’t deeply care that my mother was what we would now say “ahead of her time” She’s 90 now and still a formidable woman, but I still maintain that the traditional modeling for men and woman started changing after World War II and I do think positive cultural changes occur over time. It “feels” regressive to me to have a period of “victim culture” but perhaps it is because the current young generation is several generations removed from the new left cultural changes that occurred from the 50s to the 70s so instead of seeing themselves as culture changers through a position of strength they come from a position of seeing themselves as changing culture by presenting as victims of something bigger than themselves. I don’t know. It is fascinating however.
@momofthreeboys Lets be real. The phrase “victim culture” is a pejorative term used by some to indicate their displeasure of today’s generation. Todays generation is concerned with social, racial, and economic equality and eradicating the systemic institutions influencing inequality. Perhaps language and other cultural influences can be a systemic cause.
Millennials are not advocating for a period of “victim culture”… they are seeing themselves as coming from a position of strength to take on systemic inequalities.
Calling them “victim cultured” is a slur meant to demean.
And “toxic masculinity”. Isn’t that prejorative? Sauce for the goose as they say.
Sorta like “rape culture”?? I didn’t coin “victim culture” nor did I coin “rape culture.” Put those on our media. I don’t believe or like the term “rape culture” so I am more than happy to never use “victim culture” again or really any “culture” buzzwords. It doesn’t change what is happening on campuses or how the “movement” is occurring. Typically culture changes occur because of diffusion of ideas from one group to another. That generally takes place as groups become more unified in their positions not because one group forces their ideas on another. Also culture changes because groups bond together and meld their positions…that is not occurring right now especially on college campuses where there are all sorts of special interest groups vying for attention and for their particular grievances to be heard. Even if college students can manage to get to one or two or maybe even three big issues to sell the cultural shifts may not happen simultaneously and they will not occur quickly and never have…but right now in my opinion i think there are far too many “special interests” groups scrambling around to be heard and I’m not convinced that are operating from a position of strength and mobilization. Maybe a few more cultural anthropology classes are in order.
All the pronoun favorers for instance…why did THEY not approach administration with a drop down of limited pronouns and drive the process and acceptance? A huge political miss I think probably do to lack or organization between all the “impacted” special interests. It’s always easier to complain than be part of the solution.
While I fully believe there’s enough of toxic masculinity in today’s society which culminates in violence and war, I am not really sure that asking men to be more nurturing, willing to express emotions, and caregiving is the right path. I think instead that everyone should be encouraged to find their natural tendencies regardless of gender. There are enough women who are not caregivers or nurturers, and are completely stoic. That’s fine too. In other words, there is nothing wrong with being who you are regardless of gender, and men and women should both feel free to be nurturers or not nurturers. It’s an individual choice.
Yes.
I have to disagree with you that large groups of millennial college students aren’t “unified” in their quest against rooting out systemic inequalities and creating a more inclusive society… Bernie Sanders had an overwhelming number of college students’ support and he ran on the campaign that current college students are fighting.
They are cohesive. Perhaps we are not listening.
As for why transgender, intersex and gender fluid students haven’t solely led the effective campaign to approach administration with (in your words) a “limited dropdown menu” to drive the policy…
Perhaps it’s because in terms of percentage of population their actual numbers are small in college student populations. Many are attacked in acts of hate crimes and killed every day, and/or kicked out of their houses by parents influenced by large institutional (religious) groups intent on demonization. They haven’t felt safe or secure enough in their accepted place in society, and cohesive federal laws aren’t in place to protect them, so others have been speaking up for them to help end this violence and promote inclusion. IMO, bravo for students speaking up in attempts to be more inclusive of them. Its working. They are starting to speak up.
Lets get back to the toxic masculinity problem, when 1 out of every 5 women on campus has been subjected to some form of sexual assault, and we don’t seem to be making effective change, then yes, I applaud these men for wanting to take a look at things they may be complicit in that keeps these statistics and cultural institutions alive.
Personally, I think their marketing choice of using the shock words “toxic masculinity” undermines their outreach. I think they could benefit from better marketing of their efforts.