Sexism against males - why does no one acknowledge this?

On the other hand, I don't think it's fair for one to select which context matters and which doesn't. The fact of the matter is that men /will/ do it to be polite and I think it's arbitrary to split the phenomenon apart and say: in this instance men are being polite and it's okay, but in this instance it's an example of chivalry.

Anyways, chivalry isn't meaningfully sexist - it's just an honour code reflecting on how a knight should treat men, women, and god. I mean, knights were a warrior class, and since warriors tended to be men, it makes sense in the olden days a knight's duties through chivalry will have differences in how men and women are treated. Also because women tend to be the subject of a knight's desire, but that has to do more with sexual identity than sexism. But at the end of the day, chivalry is about service. The details as they've been practiced in history may have treated men and women differently, but the general idea is service and honour.

I guess chivalry has been appropriated in modern times to describe how societies protect women,and treat men as relatively expendable. It is sexist, and I don't think women are on the short end of the stick.

Oh, so, since I have Chivalry, that means I'm a sexist male? What? No.

I get so pissed whenever people equate Chivalry with sexism. Learn your dang history.

In old times, Chivalry included Courting - but the Courting system was never incorporated in other aspects of Chivalry. Courting was a specific method of getting a romantic interest to fall for you, but the knights didn't treat women nicely just to get in their pants. They treated them that way because they were REQUIRED to by their protect-those-that-cannot-protect-themselves and uphold-the-honour-of-others mentality.

Knights didn't just hold open doors and do other gestures for women - they did it for men, children, and the elderly. They even did it for other knights, just because it was the NICE thing to do.

If you are in a better position that the person you're courting, then you should pay for things. Period. In the past, this used to be men paying for women, because men had all the jobs. That made SENSE. It wasn't sexist - it was proper. Now that isn't the case. And even though men paying is still a habit, it isn't a habit based in sexism.

Don't say Chivalry is sexist when that is a blatant lie.

Scarf said:

...
Certainly things for women have gotten better in the last few decades, but I don't see why that makes what happens today "blown out of proportion." I'm kind of not sure what you're saying specifically about hormones, but I'm hoping it's not one of those "boys will be boys" things.
....

Click to expand...

Cropped for clarity.

No, not the "boys will be boys" but humans will be animals, we are animals, and our instinctual behavior is to propagate, in other words, breed. While there are some people, like me, who are simply not interested in mating of any sort, we cannot expect everyone to simply ignore the instinct just because of that. Courting methods have changed, and even today many cultures have very different courting methods that are considered effective. It's actually how natural selection works, some people will have bad courting methods, and they will not be capable of attracting a mate because of it, and thus their courting methods will have a smaller chance of recurring in the next generation. Typically, those with bad courting methods are also less intelligent and have worse social capabilities, thus we really don't want their genes in the pool anyway, do we?

The problem is not that sexism happens, the problem is when sexism interferes with a person's life, that's when it should be addressed beyond mockery and shunning. Such as a boss who only promotes a particular gender in the work place, that is sexism that should be addressed. But the cat calling construction workers are inconsequential to the general scheme of things, and likely should just be ignored and allowed to fade away with each new generation. That is the difference, when someone makes an off-color joke and suddenly there's an inquisition calling for their head, that's blowing it out of proportion.

I think the reason why sexism exists for both genders is because society encourages genderism, which emphasizes gender binary viewpoint. I personally don't support genderism, because I think gender roles should be looked at from a gradient perspective, tolerating that one person could have some degree of masculinity and feminity instead of "this or that" thinking which easily leads to unnecessary stereotyping, bias, and discrimination. Personally I'd even go as far as to argue that one of the main reasons for LGBT discrimination comes from genderism, but I digress. Moving on.

So what causes society to develop sexism? As much as it depends on each person's upbringing, I personally think big part of the blame has to go to the media. I'll look at this only from masculine point of view because this thread pertains mainly to sexism against males; Many successful men in media are shown to be strong, powerful, indepent, and outright "not feminine." Because of this, many people in society have slowly been brainwashed into thinking as such. Same goes for females with different circumstances but again, I digress. I think such distinction that's made between males and females encourage a gender binary viewpoint, which as I said earlier is just a poor belief to embody in my opinion.

I think masculinity that is forced upon males is less stressed upon than expectations of femininity revolving around females, because from a face value, being strong, powerful, and independent are good characteristics to have for any person. What people don't realize, though, is that these expectations come at a cost, because males who don't meet the lofty expectations of masculinity often develop sense of social insecurity (and that's just one of many problems, I could list more consequences but right now I'm too tired). All I've said I think is just some of the flaws that I think today's society has in dealing with sex and gender roles.

Seattle said:

I think masculinity that is forced upon males is less stressed upon than expectations of femininity revolving around females, because from a face value, being strong, powerful, and independent are good characteristics to have for any person. What people don't realize, though, is that these expectations come at a cost, because males who don't meet the lofty expectations of masculinity often develop sense of social insecurity (and that's just one of many problems, I could list more consequences but right now I'm too tired). All I've said I think is just some of the flaws that I think today's society has in dealing with sex and gender roles.

Click to expand...

As it relates to the thread topic, especially this. Masculinity is as forced upon males as femininity is forced upon females. Men are raised to be a certain way, and if they don't meet expectations, they aren't treated as respectfully as their peers. There are expectations to be the provider, to be dominant, and to sacrifice if needs be. The point isn't whether or not these characteristics are good or bad, but that they're expectations that create pressure. You could be the nicest person in the world but you wouldn't feel good about it if it's because of a feeling that's biting on your ass all the time.

BlahISuck said:

As it relates to the thread topic, especially this. Masculinity is as forced upon males as femininity is forced upon females. Men are raised to be a certain way, and if they don't meet expectations, they aren't treated as respectfully as their peers. There are expectations to be the provider, to be dominant, and to sacrifice if needs be. The point isn't whether or not these characteristics are good or bad, but that they're expectations that create pressure. You could be the nicest person in the world but you wouldn't feel good about it if it's because of a feeling that's biting on your ass all the time.

Click to expand...

Seattle made a good point that connects to your point here, the most common problems in society are caused by social standards, and those social standards need to be discarded. Children do not have the notions you mention in this post inherently, they are taught that by their idiotic parents who are often too primitive to consider the damage their "standards" have caused.

Rezilia said:

Oh, so, since I have Chivalry, that means I'm a sexist male? What? No.

Click to expand...

actually, yes. That means you are implicitly sexist. Read up on benevolent sexism.

Magic Christmas Lights said:

actually, yes. That means you are implicitly sexist. Read up on benevolent sexism.

Click to expand...

Read up on Chivalry and get back to me.

Also -

Gender: Female

As for everything else, I already explained it in my posts. Chivalry isn't benevolent sexism. It's a common courtesy system for EVERYONE - not just towards females.

lollygag said:

I'm Catholic and I have NEVER molested any boys. Watch what you say.

Anyway, the country of Sweden encourages sexism against men - Sweden forbids gender-specific marketing to children (as if a little boy is so likely to ask for play make-up or something). Sweden gives favorable treatment to women in EVERYTHING. A man can be strip searched by a woman but a man cannot strip search a woman. Swedish women are given money just for giving birth, even if they prove themselves to be terrible mothers. And a gross percentage of Swedish children never get to see their own fathers. Seriously, Sweden, do you even care about your male citizens? Blame it on Sweden being controlled by feminists - it's surprising that the prime minister is a man. I guess Sweden is to feminism as Saudi Arabia is to misogyny - taking it too far.

Considering Sweden's a very blond country, it only fuels into the disgusting myth that blond men are effeminate by nature. (Yet Norway, Finland, Germany, Poland, and Russia are also very blond countries and they don't treat men like that. Actually, other Scandinavian countries do get a little carried away with feminism too, but at least Norway, Finland, and Denmark treat men better than Sweden does.)

Actually, Sweden isn't feminist. It's feminazi. Real feminists do not advocate treating men as second-class citizens. It's just that feminazis have hijacked the feminist movement the same way that Islamists have hijacked Islam.

Click to expand...

Woaw, woaw, woaw, WOAW.
You talk about sexism and then you bash an entire country? Talk about double standards here. I can confirm something and that is your view of Sweden is so scewed and wrong I can't even begin to correct it. You've got to be trolling or something.
Is this the "raging racism is okay, but smidgeons of sexism isn't" thread?

KittenKoder said:

Seattle made a good point that connects to your point here, the most common problems in society are caused by social standards, and those social standards need to be discarded. Children do not have the notions you mention in this post inherently, they are taught that by their idiotic parents who are often too primitive to consider the damage their "standards" have caused.

Click to expand...

I also think that parents have a pretty large part in what kind of standards get passed down to their kids. Blame the media all you want, I do it, but they aren't the only culprit. But parenthood is so much of a sacred cow that we can't often interfere with what parents do with their kids.

Scarf said:

I also think that parents have a pretty large part in what kind of standards get passed down to their kids. Blame the media all you want, I do it, but they aren't the only culprit. But parenthood is so much of a sacred cow that we can't often interfere with what parents do with their kids.

Click to expand...

It has always bothered me, this point you make. It was because of it being a sacred cow that my mother was able to abuse me within the law in ways that have only recently been recognized in the US as abuse.

Rezilia said:

Read up on Chivalry and get back to me.

Also -

Gender: Female

As for everything else, I already explained it in my posts. Chivalry isn't benevolent sexism. It's a common courtesy system for EVERYONE - not just towards females.

Click to expand...

Technically, it is, depending on how you look at it. If you look at it as "helping females" or even "helping males" then it does become sexism. Sexism isn't about being negative, it's actually about defining a boundary between them when none exists. I like chivalry, I think it's quaint and even sweet. While it would be nice to discard all arbitrary barriers between the genders, many times sexism is actually a courting method, as I detailed previously.

The problem is that we cannot get into everyone's head, we don't know what other people are thinking. Often sexism can be harmless, more often than not it's actually part of a courting method. The important thing is what you are thinking when you do it, thinking one gender as inferior makes the sexism bad, not thinking of them as inferior makes it inconsequential. But again, we don't know what everyone else is thinking.

That leads back to my "blowing it out of proportion" point. Dialog is the greatest tool we have as a species, we need to use it more, if in doubt, ask them why they are doing it. Holding a door may just be because they see your hands are full, or perhaps they just became the local "doorman" for a crowd of people and decided "what's one more moment to hold this door for a beautiful person?" There are some local guys who make comments about me showing my legs, is it sexism? Yes, but it's perfectly harmless because even in cold weather I wear skirts, my legs get hot and sweaty in pants when I am walking a lot. They mean no harm, they expect nothing of me, and they make no passes at me, it's just their whit.

Magic Christmas Lights said:

I can understand this. It is a bit patronizing, isn't it? Women are perfectly capable of opening their own doors; it takes less than five seconds and it's no problem. I get offended when guys pull out chairs for me and do other stuff like that. It's like, gee thanks for doing something that I could've done myself in two seconds. It doesn't really help the woman in a meaningful way.

It's called benevolent sexism, and it's still sexism even if it seems positive.

Click to expand...

I don't think you should get offended when someone is trying to be nice, even if it is perhaps misplaced, and especially if it's a societal construct that they're expected to engage in. You can speak out against it in general, but lashing out when someone does something that they see as expected or even good-natured is just misplaced anger. They weren't actively trying to be malicious, it's just what they were taught. If you perceive such rules as unjust, by all means speak out about them and inform people of your concerns, but getting upset when someone does something like this is probably not going to help you convince them of your viewpoint.

Also, while you may or may not have a point about pulling chairs out and such (that's something that's so simple that helping with it is more of a show than anything), I hold doors open for anyone who gets close, not just women. I also sometimes pay for friends' meals if I'm making a bit extra money and they're making a bit less.

twocows said:

I don't think you should get offended when someone is trying to be nice, even if it is perhaps misplaced, and especially if it's a societal construct that they're expected to engage in. You can speak out against it in general, but lashing out when someone does something that they see as expected or even good-natured is just misplaced anger. They weren't actively trying to be malicious, it's just what they were taught. If you perceive such rules as unjust, by all means speak out about them and inform people of your concerns, but getting upset when someone does something like this is probably not going to help you convince them of your viewpoint.

Also, while you may or may not have a point about pulling chairs out and such (that's something that's so simple that helping with it is more of a show than anything), I hold doors open for anyone who gets close, not just women. I also sometimes pay for friends' meals if I'm making a bit extra money and they're making a bit less.

Click to expand...

Personally, I love it when someone, male or female, makes a show of attempting to impress me in such a way. I say "male or female" because I have had butch lesbians do the chair thing for me in fancy restaurants. Makes me feel more important, and that's generally the reason it's done now, to show that you are someone important to them. One lesbian I know in this city is overly protective of me, made her girlfriend jealous many times, she treats me like her younger sister. I think it's sweet, and certainly not sexist in any way, though technically it is a form of sexism as she only does such things for "pretty ladies," it's how she says it.

I think a lot of people complaining just need to consider how much class they have missed out on, and how much attention people give them just for being attractive to them. I guess it's a self esteem issue, but that's just a guess. I get so many random gifts from people, things they just thought I would like, I love it.

I don't have time to read the entire thread, forgive me.

But to answer exactly what the title says, nobody acknowledges "sexism" against men because it's nowhere near as a big systemic issue around the world as it is against women. Simply put, sexism as a concept is a double-edged sword which effects both genders. Sexist notions are intertwined with each other - an example being that men are "sex pigs" simply because "women won't put out", and other sorts of nonsense.

I have better things to do with my time than "debate male sexism" right now. Just try and think of how gender roles effect each other and how they act together to try and get an understanding of the bigger picture.

KittenKoder you make some really good points. The general consensus in this thread so far seems to be that sexism does indeed go both ways.

I would like to link a news incident that occurred on an Australian airline back in 2002.

Basically the crust of the story is that a 33 year old fireman was sitting next to two unaccompanied minors. Shortly before take off the flight attendant asked the fireman he had to move because he can't sit next to unaccompanied minors, citing policy due to the safety priority of the children.

The attendant then asked a female passenger to swap seats with him:

Mr McGirr said the attendant then asked a fellow female passenger, "Can you please sit in this seat because he is not allowed to sit next to minors."
"After that I got really embarrassed because she didn't even explain. I just got up and shook my head a little, trying to get some dignity out of the situation," he said.
"And that was it. I pretty much sat through the flight getting angrier."

Click to expand...

http://www.theage.com.au/travel/tra...ves-virgin-to-think-again-20120810-23y7q.html

It's unfortunate that the airline treated him as a potential paedophile despite his professional status as a firefighter. Absolutely awful situation to be in.

Gender inequality on both sides of the street is something I've never understood. I open the door for everyone and I expect others to do the same, it's weird and rude when someone opens the door for me but not a man. :P To me I just look at people as people as opposed to woman/man and I don't even really think about it. If most people thought that way I don't think that gender oppression would really be an issue.

Not sure if there's ever a point where it's considered "late" to jump in, but just my general thoughts on the issue...

I think the biggest problem with "combating" sexism or fighting for rights for a certain gender is carrying that notion that the genders are inherently different. And I don't mean physiologically, men and women are biologically different and that is a given; it's the mentality that assumes men and women are of two separate "parties" that need to be treated equally. The difference in genders is physical only but we certainly do not treat it that way.

We should strive for fair treatment for people as a whole. All of us deal with prejudices and skewed perspectives and we need to champion the cause of general societal decency as opposed to the rights of one imposed "category" of people.

IMO, feminism is as silly as affirmative action and minority rights groups because we need to stop viewing the subjects of mistreatment as needing these rights to match some arbitrary standard we apply to everyone "else". Don't you see the implication that there is some idea of a "normal" subset of people that we need to make everyone else equal to? That just relegates whoever is represented by the group as someone different and not "normal".

The best way to deal with sexism in my honest opinion is to stop talking about it. Stop thinking that women/men need to have rights fought for and instead fight for fair treatment of everyone. Break the concept of the physical difference somehow making us different entities in society. We are all part of one body of people and one only: let's start acting like it.

LoudSilence said:

Not sure if there's ever a point where it's considered "late" to jump in, but just my general thoughts on the issue...

I think the biggest problem with "combating" sexism or fighting for rights for a certain gender is carrying that notion that the genders are inherently different. And I don't mean physiologically, men and women are biologically different and that is a given; it's the mentality that assumes men and women are of two separate "parties" that need to be treated equally. The difference in genders is physical only but we certainly do not treat it that way.

We should strive for fair treatment for people as a whole. All of us deal with prejudices and skewed perspectives and we need to champion the cause of general societal decency as opposed to the rights of one imposed "category" of people.

IMO, feminism is as silly as affirmative action and minority rights groups because we need to stop viewing the subjects of mistreatment as needing these rights to match some arbitrary standard we apply to everyone "else". Don't you see the implication that there is some idea of a "normal" subset of people that we need to make everyone else equal to? That just relegates whoever is represented by the group as someone different and not "normal".

The best way to deal with sexism in my honest opinion is to stop talking about it. Stop thinking that women/men need to have rights fought for and instead fight for fair treatment of everyone. Break the concept of the physical difference somehow making us different entities in society. We are all part of one body of people and one only: let's start acting like it.

Click to expand...

Actually, the only real differences are physiologically, there is only one biological difference that is not cosmetic or physiological and that isn't as different as we once though. The real differences are which chemicals the cells process and produce. ;) The rest of your post is pretty spot on.

this is my favourite thread to ever exist

the only two areas where men face issues which could even be considered as sexist are parental custody lawsuits & female-on-male or man-on-man rape cases

and in both cases, the perceived sexism is a result of the society that men have built for themselves, a double edged sword
this 'sexism' is simply the patriarchy working in a way that does not suit men

for centuries, possibly even millennia, men have deemed that women are only fit for the kitchen and raising kids
and now, in modern times, this is working against them in parental custody lawsuits - more or less the only area in law which is not heavily favoured towards men
because women have for so long been typecast as the only being fit for raising kids, naturally there is going to be a bias towards them, the loving mother who gave up her life to raise the father's child

and for rape
well
blame the patriarchy again
female-on-male rape cases are treated as a joke because, thanks to age old thinking that man > women, a woman cannot be superior to a man
she cannot be physically stronger
as emotionally empty as a male rapist
it cannot be possible for a woman to take advantage of a man the same way that men have since the dawn of civilisation

tl;dr - sexism against men is not an issue
the patriarchy is

I have to wonder though whether the parental custody suits would be considered the patriarchy working against the men. I would consider that as working in their favour, but I guess it's all down to perspective.