Author Topic: Why do so few men "follow/fanboy/support" women, when the reverse is not true?  (Read 22563 times)

Boofinator

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
Sometimes it is better to just say no.


Better for whom?  Kids learn from their parents, and what they learn is not always what the parents intend to teach them.  And if they learn the wrong lessons there will come a point, all too soon, when it is too late to start teaching the right ones.

Better for everyone? Knowing when to say no to unnecessary expectations is critical to living a self-actualizing life. I'm not suggesting saying no to everything. (And to illustrate my point, enough people said "no" to the silly workday dance that they almost had to cancel (apparently they shamed enough people into showing up). In my time (and in my kids' time), dances were (and are) held in the evenings.)

FrugalToque

  • Global Moderator
  • Pencil Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 568
  • Location: Canada
You don't have to fanboy the bad ones, you shouldn't fanboy the bad ones.  The point is that the good ones should get fanboyed.

I do this within reason. If a woman is achieving to a high level in any activity that I'm interested I think it's great. I don't ensure that I fanboy women and men equally. I don't make gender an issue. I don't fanboy many people either.

A good question is should everyone really be on this forum ? It was started by a man. Admittedly it was just one man but is this forum just another example of the patriarchy ? I don't believe in the patriarchy but can anyone who believes in the patriarchy and equal outcomes really frequent this webpage and/or forum. Should we all up and leave and go to a female run FIRE site ?

Everyone can use this forum as long as they follow the rules.

The forum is a part of the society in which we live and is therefore a part of the patriarchy.  That's unavoidable.  Basically, if you live here, you breathe in all the racism, sexism and every other bias that permeates our air.

We keep it from turning into a tool of the patriarchy by making sure that we acknowledge the existence of sexism and its effects on our society.  We should not pretend that sexism does not exist, nor pretend that men are not advantaged in our society.  We should know that women who reach the same level of achievement that men reach generally had to scale a number of extra barriers to get there.

By acknowledgement of those simple, obvious facts about our society, we make this forum a more open and welcoming place for everyone to learn about and discuss financial independence.  If we pretend sexism doesn't exist, or constantly demand some absurd level of proof regarding something so obvious, we'd make half the population feel like outsiders, and I have no desire to do that.

Toque.

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6344
To (respectfully) play the devil's advocate, is it possible your husband just gives less fucks than you about the dance?

It might well be. But that still prompts the question, why does he care less? And why does almost every other father also care less?

We're socialized to think that we're supposed to care more. And that certain jobs are "ours" in the family. And often at work, for that matter.

And since both men and women are socialized to think this, both men and women tend to think that it's "natural," instead of possibly a social construct.

https://qz.com/work/1286996/an-extremely-clear-definition-of-emotional-labor-from-adam-grants-podcast/
I am not sure why he does not care.  In all honesty, neither one of us signed up to chaperone because we are quite confident that it would not be "cool" to our son for us to be there.  I love dances and dancing but I would never be there and embarrass him.  It's hard enough to be almost-13 and the height of your average 9 or 10 year old without adding mom to the mix.

It's interesting though to think about who cares about what.  Like: sports.  Neither of us are particularly into sports.  We both played one sport in HS.  We played volleyball together a lot when dating and early married.  Our big kid tried a couple of things, wasn't really into them, and then did 3 years of baseball starting at age 9.  Recently quit.  In any event, we were discussing him and whether to get him into "something else", and also started discussing the 6 year old.  (It's rare for us to have time to actually talk to each other.)  It started with "should we sign 6yo up for a sport?"  I said "no.  He doesn't appear to be interested - big bro wasn't either at this age - and I don't have the bandwidth."  Husband pointed out that it wouldn't be THAT HARD and I just laughed.  He's incredibly stressed out right now.  We are BOTH swamped with work and just juggling drop off and pick up at two schools, plus dentist appts, orthodontist appts, early release days, is a pain!  PLUS he's been traveling a ton and everything falls to me.  No thanks.  I think we agreed for now, no sports. 

But a great deal of it isn't necessarily "lack of interest".  He's an incredibly involved parent - household chores are basically 50/50.  When it comes to school things, he just is far less likely to volunteer - and that is the case for most men at our school.  Our school is not a school with a passel of SAHMs either.  Almost the entire PTA board since I've been there has been made up with FT working parents - about 90% moms but we've had 4-5 dads in there too.  I've been to many of his company events and spoken to many of the VPs and the President.  I know how they think.  They really want mom to be at home and like having men working for them who are unencumbered and can work more hours.  It's the expectation.  The only thing he's volunteered for at the school was something I basically signed him up for.  (It was a good fit - teaching the math club for our son's grade when he was in it.  But it was a fair bit of work.  If he hadn't signed up there would not have been a math team from our school for those 3 years.)

"I can't because I have to work", for most of the dads that I know means "My job is more important than yours".  It's not like I have this great gig at work either.  I take PTO for all of these things.

Not to keep quoting Kris, but I will:

Quote
Well, the thing is, I think that the idea of men going "above and beyond," as you say above, is part of the issue. And the fact that those kinds of things also tend to be one-time, large projects -- often initiated by the man himself -- instead of daily/weekly/monthly tasks designed to keep the house going.

It's not that that stuff isn't great. It's precisely that it's considered "extra." Whereas the work I'm talking about is considered "expected." I think it's great that my husband does stuff like that. But it's stuff that he actually enjoys, and engineers as a project. I am very appreciative. In between cleaning out the litter box and doing the laundry, that is.

Edit: Example of "emotional labor" that I am doing in our household, that probably "should" fall to my husband, all things being equal: Buying Christmas and birthday presents for his two adult children (I have no children of my own), their spouses, and the grandkids. My husband barely remembers his daughters' birthdays, and has no idea when the grandkids' birthdays are.

(N.B.: In my household, the labor is actually very equally distributed as to the regular household chores. I am not complaining about that. But yes, on top of that, I still am the emotional labor person, for sure.)

I've had this exact discussion with my neighbor several times in the last 6 months.  It's a frustration of hers.  Her husband (and mine now) have both been VERY involved in house projects or landscaping projects.  They are both engineers so they decide what to do, design it up, plan it out, work on it all weekend (for many weekends).  Large, fun projects.  My husband and I did that together when we first bought the house.  Painting, building cabinets, staining doors, etc.  What frustrates her IMMENSELY is that she's stuck with mountains of laundry and cooking all weekend long (and during the week).  And he's always asking "what's for dinner?"  The emotional labor involved in constantly making sure there is food, deciding what to make, cooking it (for a full family) - plus the physical labor of that and laundry is...crappy.  She'd love to spend all weekend working on a landscaping project and ask "what's for dinner?" at 5 pm too.

Thing is, someone has to look after the kids and put food on the table.  I get frustrated too (less than she does because my husband does all the laundry).  A couple of nights a week I get home late and I'm really tired of having to plan every frigging meal.  Figure it out!

On the gifts and such - I've slowly just backed off.  His family is more into gifts than mine.  I've just stopped getting gifts for his sister, niece, nephew, parents.  Look, they are your family.  That is your job.  Of course, that means he missed his mom's birthday in Nov and then kept asking me what to do for Christmas.  I really didn't want to think about it, but in the end I said "well, you missed her birthday, just buy her a flipping plane ticket."  So in the end, I didn't get out of it either.

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6344
Sometimes it is better to just say no.


Better for whom?  Kids learn from their parents, and what they learn is not always what the parents intend to teach them.  And if they learn the wrong lessons there will come a point, all too soon, when it is too late to start teaching the right ones.

Better for everyone? Knowing when to say no to unnecessary expectations is critical to living a self-actualizing life. I'm not suggesting saying no to everything. (And to illustrate my point, enough people said "no" to the silly workday dance that they almost had to cancel (apparently they shamed enough people into showing up). In my time (and in my kids' time), dances were (and are) held in the evenings.)

Quote
My retort would have to recall the Joneses: "All the other kids' mommies bought a new Volvo with the latest and greatest safety features to protect their families, do you not care about the lives of your children?" (And of course, the OP was pressured into going to the dance precisely because all of the other kids' mommies (and daddies) weren't at the dance.)

Sometimes it is better to just say no.

The dance starts at 6.

Setup starts at 3:30.

If you are delivering food, it can arrive at 5:45.

It's not a silly "workday" dance.  But setup needs to happen.

I donated $500 to the school for the program materials (books, field trips, ballroom lessons).  2 hours of PTO is far less than that.


Also, I say no plenty.

This is a low income, poor school.

85% of the students are eligible for free lunch.  A lot of poverty.

If we were at the school across town?  Shoot, they raise hundreds of thousands of dollars and moms do dropoff with their Starbucks carrying their Coach bags while driving their BMWs, Teslas, and Escalades.  They'd probably rent out a hotel, not use a church hall.

The reason why they need volunteers is because there is literally no other way to put it on.  As in, they can't rent a space or rent dishes and tables.  We provide the table settings, napkins, tablecloth, then take them home and wash them ourselves.  The cost to attend the dance is $20.  But nobody will be turned away if they cannot pay.  And there is a donation process in place for the kids who do not have, and cannot afford, appropriate attire (slacks, nice clothing, etc.)

It is one of two events in the entire school year.

When everyone says no, nothing happens.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2019, 12:53:33 PM by mm1970 »

J Boogie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 879
Here's a bit of the perspective from the other side.

I've remodeled our kitchen about a year ago and now I'm doing our bathroom.

I like woodworking, I don't particularly enjoy this work. It can be stressful, overwhelming, and require tons of research to ensure I'm not fucking things up and doing a job that will need to be redone at considerable cost by a professional down the road. Sure it can be satisfying like anything to hit milestones and finally accomplish it, but I'd rather spend my evenings and weekends relaxing.

Anyways, the reason it isn't all gravy for me jumping into a fun project and asking what's for dinner around 5 is that my wife needs time for self care - socializing, the gym, aka not toddler time like she has 40 hrs a week. I spend plenty of time with the toddler so I fully support this. Plus we have a marriage so we make sure to spend plenty of intentional time together.

But I don't really get me time. When I do get some solo time I will spend it remodeling, because it's our only bathroom or only kitchen so it needs to get done.  Her leisure time ends up being equivalent to my work time. It's not her fault, it's just how our abilities & interests are best utilized at this moment in our lives. But it might give you an idea of why this idea that women contribute more doesn't ring true for me.



Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3823
Here's a bit of the perspective from the other side.

I've remodeled our kitchen about a year ago and now I'm doing our bathroom.

I like woodworking, I don't particularly enjoy this work. It can be stressful, overwhelming, and require tons of research to ensure I'm not fucking things up and doing a job that will need to be redone at considerable cost by a professional down the road. Sure it can be satisfying like anything to hit milestones and finally accomplish it, but I'd rather spend my evenings and weekends relaxing.

Anyways, the reason it isn't all gravy for me jumping into a fun project and asking what's for dinner around 5 is that my wife needs time for self care - socializing, the gym, aka not toddler time like she has 40 hrs a week. I spend plenty of time with the toddler so I fully support this. Plus we have a marriage so we make sure to spend plenty of intentional time together.

But I don't really get me time. When I do get some solo time I will spend it remodeling, because it's our only bathroom or only kitchen so it needs to get done.  Her leisure time ends up being equivalent to my work time. It's not her fault, it's just how our abilities & interests are best utilized at this moment in our lives. But it might give you an idea of why this idea that women contribute more doesn't ring true for me.

Well, as far as the "more" question, the study that Partgypsy linked to shows the numbers. The fact that your particular situation doesn't correspond to the numbers doesn't make the study false. Nor does the fact that in my case, I'd say my husband and I contribute about equally to the household work. We are outliers, as far as the numbers in the study is concerned.

My discussion was about the emotional labor. And as I said above, I do far more of the emotional labor in my household. It sounds like perhaps your wife might, as well.

Boofinator

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
Everyone can use this forum as long as they follow the rules.

The forum is a part of the society in which we live and is therefore a part of the patriarchy.  That's unavoidable.  Basically, if you live here, you breathe in all the racism, sexism and every other bias that permeates our air.

We keep it from turning into a tool of the patriarchy by making sure that we acknowledge the existence of sexism and its effects on our society.  We should not pretend that sexism does not exist, nor pretend that men are not advantaged in our society.  We should know that women who reach the same level of achievement that men reach generally had to scale a number of extra barriers to get there.

By acknowledgement of those simple, obvious facts about our society, we make this forum a more open and welcoming place for everyone to learn about and discuss financial independence.  If we pretend sexism doesn't exist, or constantly demand some absurd level of proof regarding something so obvious, we'd make half the population feel like outsiders, and I have no desire to do that.

Toque.

I think at least some of the disagreement in this thread comes from the use of the word "patriarchy".

To start off, the literal meaning of the word has shifted significantly within the last generation (my 1991 American Heritage dictionary does not indicate the current definition as posited by others on this thread), insomuch that it strains from its etymological origins. Even Merriam-Webster's current definition, though admitting the usage here, highlights our same topic of discussion on their website: "Many feminists have claimed that all Western societies are patriarchalóthat is, that they systematically enable men to dominate women. But there's plenty of disagreement about how this is done, and the word isn't discussed as often as it used to be."

To continue, there are few if any laws in the United States promoting rule by the male sex (this was not always the case, and hence a much better case could be made for historical patriarchy). We currently have a female speaker of the house. We almost had a female president (I think sexism played a role here). At what point does society stop becoming a patriarchy? If over half of our leaders were women, would we then be a matriarchy? Since we are underrepresented by minority groups, are we an apartheid*?

In my mind, there is no question sexism, racism, etc. exist in our society (just look at the current president). But this is very different from saying there is systematic oppression going on (the connotation of patriarchy). Or, if patriarchy is not systematic but socially ingrained, that raises a whole host of new questions: What is the bar by which a society is deemed "patriarchal"? How does one measure this bar? Are there perhaps some innate differences (not intellectual, but biologically associated with raising children) that make some difference in burden of labor between the sexes advantageous to "patriarchal" societies, or even preferential to some large percentage of members within that society (so that by Bayesian inference, 50/50 is no longer a representative sample based on preference to lead)?

So, I have to disagree that this "forum... is part of the patriarchy...", and that this is "a simple, obvious fact".** The struggle for achievement and equality will and always has been a struggle by both sexes to determine the most advantageous setup, both individually and socially (and these have many competing objectives).

*There's got to be a better word for systematic oppression by and/or to a race.

**Unless one is using patriarchy in the other historical sense: a society that uses patrilineal descent.

Cromacster

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1635
  • Location: Minnesnowta
Here's a bit of the perspective from the other side.

I've remodeled our kitchen about a year ago and now I'm doing our bathroom.

I like woodworking, I don't particularly enjoy this work. It can be stressful, overwhelming, and require tons of research to ensure I'm not fucking things up and doing a job that will need to be redone at considerable cost by a professional down the road. Sure it can be satisfying like anything to hit milestones and finally accomplish it, but I'd rather spend my evenings and weekends relaxing.

Anyways, the reason it isn't all gravy for me jumping into a fun project and asking what's for dinner around 5 is that my wife needs time for self care - socializing, the gym, aka not toddler time like she has 40 hrs a week. I spend plenty of time with the toddler so I fully support this. Plus we have a marriage so we make sure to spend plenty of intentional time together.

But I don't really get me time. When I do get some solo time I will spend it remodeling, because it's our only bathroom or only kitchen so it needs to get done.  Her leisure time ends up being equivalent to my work time. It's not her fault, it's just how our abilities & interests are best utilized at this moment in our lives. But it might give you an idea of why this idea that women contribute more doesn't ring true for me.

Well, as far as the "more" question, the study that Partgypsy linked to shows the numbers. The fact that your particular situation doesn't correspond to the numbers doesn't make the study false. Nor does the fact that in my case, I'd say my husband and I contribute about equally to the household work. We are outliers, as far as the numbers in the study is concerned.

My discussion was about the emotional labor. And as I said above, I do far more of the emotional labor in my household. It sounds like perhaps your wife might, as well.

I still don't know what the patriarchy is or if it is real, but I did learn something from this thread, Emotional Labor.

And my wife is awesome at dealing with the emotional labor parts of our lives.  I guess I knew she did, but having a word for it somehow makes it more clear.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3823
Everyone can use this forum as long as they follow the rules.

The forum is a part of the society in which we live and is therefore a part of the patriarchy.  That's unavoidable.  Basically, if you live here, you breathe in all the racism, sexism and every other bias that permeates our air.

We keep it from turning into a tool of the patriarchy by making sure that we acknowledge the existence of sexism and its effects on our society.  We should not pretend that sexism does not exist, nor pretend that men are not advantaged in our society.  We should know that women who reach the same level of achievement that men reach generally had to scale a number of extra barriers to get there.

By acknowledgement of those simple, obvious facts about our society, we make this forum a more open and welcoming place for everyone to learn about and discuss financial independence.  If we pretend sexism doesn't exist, or constantly demand some absurd level of proof regarding something so obvious, we'd make half the population feel like outsiders, and I have no desire to do that.

Toque.

I think at least some of the disagreement in this thread comes from the use of the word "patriarchy".

To start off, the literal meaning of the word has shifted significantly within the last generation (my 1991 American Heritage dictionary does not indicate the current definition as posited by others on this thread), insomuch that it strains from its etymological origins. Even Merriam-Webster's current definition, though admitting the usage here, highlights our same topic of discussion on their website: "Many feminists have claimed that all Western societies are patriarchalóthat is, that they systematically enable men to dominate women. But there's plenty of disagreement about how this is done, and the word isn't discussed as often as it used to be."

To continue, there are few if any laws in the United States promoting rule by the male sex (this was not always the case, and hence a much better case could be made for historical patriarchy). We currently have a female speaker of the house. We almost had a female president (I think sexism played a role here). At what point does society stop becoming a patriarchy? If over half of our leaders were women, would we then be a matriarchy? No, because a matriarchy is a system by which women rule, not in which women are equally represented. Since we are underrepresented by minority groups, are we an apartheid*? No, because apartheid is a system of segregation in which the white minority rules over a (black) majority.


We are living with the systemic effects of a historical patriarchy. Many of those effects are being attenuated by legislation, women's (and men's) struggle to break down those historical barriers, and hopefully increased economic, educational, and legal equality. But that doesn't mean that many of the effects of patriarchy -- i.e., the effects of a system that enabled men to dominate women for centuries -- are not still felt today.

Boofinator

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
The dance starts at 6.

Setup starts at 3:30.

If you are delivering food, it can arrive at 5:45.

It's not a silly "workday" dance.  But setup needs to happen.

I donated $500 to the school for the program materials (books, field trips, ballroom lessons).  2 hours of PTO is far less than that.


Also, I say no plenty.

This is a low income, poor school.

85% of the students are eligible for free lunch.  A lot of poverty.

If we were at the school across town?  Shoot, they raise hundreds of thousands of dollars and moms do dropoff with their Starbucks carrying their Coach bags while driving their BMWs, Teslas, and Escalades.  They'd probably rent out a hotel, not use a church hall.

The reason why they need volunteers is because there is literally no other way to put it on.  As in, they can't rent a space or rent dishes and tables.  We provide the table settings, napkins, tablecloth, then take them home and wash them ourselves.  The cost to attend the dance is $20.  But nobody will be turned away if they cannot pay.  And there is a donation process in place for the kids who do not have, and cannot afford, appropriate attire (slacks, nice clothing, etc.)

It is one of two events in the entire school year.

When everyone says no, nothing happens.

I understand better your position now. Seems like a worthy reason to take some time off. Your husband should give a few more fucks about a twice per year event.

PoutineLover

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1093
I know that I definitely do a lot more of the emotional labour in my household. Before I moved in, my partner would occasionally run out of toilet paper, or fail to clean the bathroom for a while, and he still hasn't been to a doctor or dentist in years (I'm working on that, but also he's a grown man and should be able to make an appointment for himself). I think it's pretty likely that he just doesn't see the problem like I do. I notice when there are only a few rolls of tp left, and I make a mental note to get it. He only notices when it's gone. I have a schedule in my head for chores like cleaning, laundry, groceries, etc. so stuff never gets too dirty. He only notices when it's already dirty, then he'll clean it. He doesn't see the point of going to the doctor or dentist if he doesn't have a problem, where I see it as a regular maintenance type thing. When it comes to gifts, remembering birthdays, etc. I think he just forgets because it's not on his radar or important to him, but if I bring it up he will help brainstorm ideas or make arrangements. I would say we are just wired differently, but I think it's far more likely that we are socialized differently. In both of our parent's households, the moms did far more housework and emotional labour than the dads, to the point that I don't think either of our fathers could run a household nearly as efficiently or with the same standard of cleanliness and nutrition. It's not that they don't help out with chores, because they do, and we do share the household labour, but I often have to ask if I want help with something. I don't want that to be what our children learn, and I think it'll take over a generation for kids to grow up with the idea that both parents are equal participants in all parts of the household. Media, lived experiences and general assumptions are still reinforcing this idea that women are better at managing households and men are better at earning money and being leaders.
To continue, there are few if any laws in the United States promoting rule by the male sex (this was not always the case, and hence a much better case could be made for historical patriarchy). We currently have a female speaker of the house. We almost had a female president (I think sexism played a role here). At what point does society stop becoming a patriarchy? If over half of our leaders were women, would we then be a matriarchy? Since we are underrepresented by minority groups, are we an apartheid*?
Literally the fact that there is still a debate over abortion and birth control is evidence of laws that favour men over women. Until women have the full right to control what happens to their own bodies, both in preventing and ending unwanted pregnancies, there is not equality in America (or most other countries in the world). There is no law equivalent that controls what men can do with their bodies, and the fact that viagra is funded by insurance companies without question while the supreme court decides if birth control can be excluded is a vast inequality and glaring symbol of the patriarchy.

J Boogie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 879
Here's a bit of the perspective from the other side.

I've remodeled our kitchen about a year ago and now I'm doing our bathroom.

I like woodworking, I don't particularly enjoy this work. It can be stressful, overwhelming, and require tons of research to ensure I'm not fucking things up and doing a job that will need to be redone at considerable cost by a professional down the road. Sure it can be satisfying like anything to hit milestones and finally accomplish it, but I'd rather spend my evenings and weekends relaxing.

Anyways, the reason it isn't all gravy for me jumping into a fun project and asking what's for dinner around 5 is that my wife needs time for self care - socializing, the gym, aka not toddler time like she has 40 hrs a week. I spend plenty of time with the toddler so I fully support this. Plus we have a marriage so we make sure to spend plenty of intentional time together.

But I don't really get me time. When I do get some solo time I will spend it remodeling, because it's our only bathroom or only kitchen so it needs to get done.  Her leisure time ends up being equivalent to my work time. It's not her fault, it's just how our abilities & interests are best utilized at this moment in our lives. But it might give you an idea of why this idea that women contribute more doesn't ring true for me.

Well, as far as the "more" question, the study that Partgypsy linked to shows the numbers. The fact that your particular situation doesn't correspond to the numbers doesn't make the study false. Nor does the fact that in my case, I'd say my husband and I contribute about equally to the household work. We are outliers, as far as the numbers in the study is concerned.

My discussion was about the emotional labor. And as I said above, I do far more of the emotional labor in my household. It sounds like perhaps your wife might, as well.

She absolutely does do more emotional labor. But I do more of the other kinds to the point where there is more or less parity overall, or at least no reason to suspect that one of us is doing more. And the numbers in the study bear out this same conclusion.

As I responded to PartyGypsy, the studies also show that men are working more and earning more on average. So a 50/50 split of household work would actually demonstrate that men are contributing more overall. There's nothing to suggest that women are contributing more overall given how much more men contribute financially. I guess you'd have to assign a dollar value to things like emotional labor which is really difficult. Perhaps the invaluable and unmeasurable nature of emotional labor is part of why it gets overlooked.




Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3823
Here's a bit of the perspective from the other side.

I've remodeled our kitchen about a year ago and now I'm doing our bathroom.

I like woodworking, I don't particularly enjoy this work. It can be stressful, overwhelming, and require tons of research to ensure I'm not fucking things up and doing a job that will need to be redone at considerable cost by a professional down the road. Sure it can be satisfying like anything to hit milestones and finally accomplish it, but I'd rather spend my evenings and weekends relaxing.

Anyways, the reason it isn't all gravy for me jumping into a fun project and asking what's for dinner around 5 is that my wife needs time for self care - socializing, the gym, aka not toddler time like she has 40 hrs a week. I spend plenty of time with the toddler so I fully support this. Plus we have a marriage so we make sure to spend plenty of intentional time together.

But I don't really get me time. When I do get some solo time I will spend it remodeling, because it's our only bathroom or only kitchen so it needs to get done.  Her leisure time ends up being equivalent to my work time. It's not her fault, it's just how our abilities & interests are best utilized at this moment in our lives. But it might give you an idea of why this idea that women contribute more doesn't ring true for me.

Well, as far as the "more" question, the study that Partgypsy linked to shows the numbers. The fact that your particular situation doesn't correspond to the numbers doesn't make the study false. Nor does the fact that in my case, I'd say my husband and I contribute about equally to the household work. We are outliers, as far as the numbers in the study is concerned.

My discussion was about the emotional labor. And as I said above, I do far more of the emotional labor in my household. It sounds like perhaps your wife might, as well.

She absolutely does do more emotional labor. But I do more of the other kinds to the point where there is more or less parity overall, or at least no reason to suspect that one of us is doing more. And the numbers in the study bear out this same conclusion.

As I responded to PartyGypsy, the studies also show that men are working more and earning more on average. So a 50/50 split of household work would actually demonstrate that men are contributing more overall. There's nothing to suggest that women are contributing more overall given how much more men contribute financially. I guess you'd have to assign a dollar value to things like emotional labor which is really difficult. Perhaps the invaluable and unmeasurable nature of emotional labor is part of why it gets overlooked.

Yes, I think so. And frankly, also because it is "inherently" seen as a woman's role -- starting from a time when women weren't actually able to work out of the home. Financial compensation and value tend to be fairly strongly linked in our society where work is concerned.

OneStep

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 43
  • Location: KC Metro
There is no law equivalent that controls what men can do with their bodies, and the fact that viagra is funded by insurance companies without question while the supreme court decides if birth control can be excluded is a vast inequality and glaring symbol of the patriarchy.

Women are exempt from registering for the Selective Service but men aren't. Those drafted in the past weren't allowed to choose what to do with their bodies.


PoutineLover

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1093
There is no law equivalent that controls what men can do with their bodies, and the fact that viagra is funded by insurance companies without question while the supreme court decides if birth control can be excluded is a vast inequality and glaring symbol of the patriarchy.

Women are exempt from registering for the Selective Service but men aren't. Those drafted in the past weren't allowed to choose what to do with their bodies.
Well at least one man did choose what happened to his body when he would have been drafted, and he later became president.
But either way, men made those rules, and men could change them. I personally don't think a draft should exist, and if it does, I believe that people should be allowed to choose non-violent service instead. I would say it's still an example of patriarchal thinking, because it assumes men should take on the role of aggressor or protector (however you choose to see it), while assuming that women are too weak or unwilling to aid their country.

Boofinator

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
We are living with the systemic effects of a historical patriarchy. Many of those effects are being attenuated by legislation, women's (and men's) struggle to break down those historical barriers, and hopefully increased economic, educational, and legal equality. But that doesn't mean that many of the effects of patriarchy -- i.e., the effects of a system that enabled men to dominate women for centuries -- are not still felt today.

I would say we are living with some lingering effects from patriarchy, no doubt. But these effects will always linger, just as we are living with effects from our slavery society. But I don't think there is any benefit to saying we still live in a slavery society, even though African Americans on average have more economic challenges than European Americans.

I admit the possibility that sometime in the future there could be a much more equitable distribution of "power" as the lingering effects of patriarchy fade away, and society may in turn benefit from these changes. However, I don't feel like I have the power to make such predictions. I also don't feel I have the power to say that should the representative portion of power by sex remain constant as compared to today's, that it is an indication of entrenched patriarchy.

J Boogie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 879
Here's a bit of the perspective from the other side.

I've remodeled our kitchen about a year ago and now I'm doing our bathroom.

I like woodworking, I don't particularly enjoy this work. It can be stressful, overwhelming, and require tons of research to ensure I'm not fucking things up and doing a job that will need to be redone at considerable cost by a professional down the road. Sure it can be satisfying like anything to hit milestones and finally accomplish it, but I'd rather spend my evenings and weekends relaxing.

Anyways, the reason it isn't all gravy for me jumping into a fun project and asking what's for dinner around 5 is that my wife needs time for self care - socializing, the gym, aka not toddler time like she has 40 hrs a week. I spend plenty of time with the toddler so I fully support this. Plus we have a marriage so we make sure to spend plenty of intentional time together.

But I don't really get me time. When I do get some solo time I will spend it remodeling, because it's our only bathroom or only kitchen so it needs to get done.  Her leisure time ends up being equivalent to my work time. It's not her fault, it's just how our abilities & interests are best utilized at this moment in our lives. But it might give you an idea of why this idea that women contribute more doesn't ring true for me.

Well, as far as the "more" question, the study that Partgypsy linked to shows the numbers. The fact that your particular situation doesn't correspond to the numbers doesn't make the study false. Nor does the fact that in my case, I'd say my husband and I contribute about equally to the household work. We are outliers, as far as the numbers in the study is concerned.

My discussion was about the emotional labor. And as I said above, I do far more of the emotional labor in my household. It sounds like perhaps your wife might, as well.

She absolutely does do more emotional labor. But I do more of the other kinds to the point where there is more or less parity overall, or at least no reason to suspect that one of us is doing more. And the numbers in the study bear out this same conclusion.

As I responded to PartyGypsy, the studies also show that men are working more and earning more on average. So a 50/50 split of household work would actually demonstrate that men are contributing more overall. There's nothing to suggest that women are contributing more overall given how much more men contribute financially. I guess you'd have to assign a dollar value to things like emotional labor which is really difficult. Perhaps the invaluable and unmeasurable nature of emotional labor is part of why it gets overlooked.

Yes, I think so. And frankly, also because it is "inherently" seen as a woman's role -- starting from a time when women weren't actually able to work out of the home. Financial compensation and value tend to be fairly strongly linked in our society where work is concerned.

Agreed. And that kind of brings us back to my initial take on OP's question, which is that men have historically had way more opportunities to do a wider variety of remarkable things that would cause someone to fan out over them. How many of these men that have a fan base are also stay at home parents?

Boofinator

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
To continue, there are few if any laws in the United States promoting rule by the male sex (this was not always the case, and hence a much better case could be made for historical patriarchy). We currently have a female speaker of the house. We almost had a female president (I think sexism played a role here). At what point does society stop becoming a patriarchy? If over half of our leaders were women, would we then be a matriarchy? Since we are underrepresented by minority groups, are we an apartheid*?
Literally the fact that there is still a debate over abortion and birth control is evidence of laws that favour men over women. Until women have the full right to control what happens to their own bodies, both in preventing and ending unwanted pregnancies, there is not equality in America (or most other countries in the world). There is no law equivalent that controls what men can do with their bodies, and the fact that viagra is funded by insurance companies without question while the supreme court decides if birth control can be excluded is a vast inequality and glaring symbol of the patriarchy.

Touchť. I couldn't agree more about abortion, and rue the day should the Supreme Court ever makes substantive changes. Tangentially, reminiscently, and perhaps ironically, my mother used to take me to anti-abortion pickets when I was a young kid. She also voted for Trump. Needless to say, we don't often see eye-to-eye.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944

A good question is should everyone really be on this forum ? It was started by a man. Admittedly it was just one man but is this forum just another example of the patriarchy ? I don't believe in the patriarchy but can anyone who believes in the patriarchy and equal outcomes really frequent this webpage and/or forum. Should we all up and leave and go to a female run FIRE site ?

LOLOL.  So silly.  It's a good thing I wasn't drinking anything when I read this.

Why is it silly ?

Boofinator

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
Agreed. And that kind of brings us back to my initial take on OP's question, which is that men have historically had way more opportunities to do a wider variety of remarkable things that would cause someone to fan out over them. How many of these men that have a fan base are also stay at home parents?

Interesting question, since we are all chatting on the dude's website at the moment.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
Just saw this thread but and skimmed quickly so if my thoughts align the same as someone elses so be it.

Other than work I don't and have never thought like that. I was in the Military and in a lot of cases Women did a better job then a lot of the men. As far as sports go I watch Womens basketball because fundamentally its better than mens because its not just all 3 pointers and slam dunks BUT usually the Top 20 Teams. Same with Womens soccer and I also really enjoy Womens Softball. I also really enjoy watching the Womens National Team and love the Women Olympians in both swimming and Gymnastics particularly. My only hang up with Women and sports is more whole locker room thing but I don't think its the Women fault as much as it is finding away for Women to be involved without men hazing or harassing them. Also having a Daughter (And a College Athlete) I think makes one more sensitive to these things.

I think the Me2 movement was a good thing but now is getting out of hand and having 3 boys the fact that all its takes is an accusation and there life could be ruined trying to defend themselves there is something wrong. We need tougher laws that if a person makes an accusation for no other reason "than just because" they need to be punished for it. And I am sure that could be said for men accusing Women falsely.

Actors or Actresses for me its whoever can carry the role. The only argument I hear and understand is in some cases equal pay does need to mean equal ticket sales or spectators.

In the job world its stupid the your sex should determine your rate of pay especially in a world that has changed so much where you need in a lot if not most cases 2 incomes to have anything. When I was working (owned my own business) I will say though that I did run into plenty of Women that were in leadership roles that were sexist just as much in decision making if not more than men. So it goes both ways as far as I am concerned where that is. But again why shouldn't the pay be the same as long as both people can do the task. Its not going as fast as everyone would like it but I do think things are getting better as I know many many people where the Women now are the bread winners.

Great post. Things have changed a lot. I think feminists now are really looking for issues that they have to look really hard at to find something wrong and it's not black and white. I think you have to stop at some point and accept that you won't ever have equality of outcome because human beings have and will never role that way. You wouldn't even want that because the only time in history I can think of this occurring was in the Pol Pot regime. It would take a real bunch of crazy psychopaths to actually try and force that on society.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
You don't have to fanboy the bad ones, you shouldn't fanboy the bad ones.  The point is that the good ones should get fanboyed.

I do this within reason. If a woman is achieving to a high level in any activity that I'm interested I think it's great. I don't ensure that I fanboy women and men equally. I don't make gender an issue. I don't fanboy many people either.

A good question is should everyone really be on this forum ? It was started by a man. Admittedly it was just one man but is this forum just another example of the patriarchy ? I don't believe in the patriarchy but can anyone who believes in the patriarchy and equal outcomes really frequent this webpage and/or forum. Should we all up and leave and go to a female run FIRE site ?

Whether or not you like it, we live in a patriarchy.  Avoiding white male dominated stuff would radically limit the things you can do.  You wouldn't be able to go to court, talk with political representatives, buy lumber (or hire a contractor for anything around the house), have your computer fixed, contact fire or police services in an emergency, buy oil, trade on the stock market, bank, etc.

Do you honestly think that this is a reasonable approach to take?  If so, why?

I think that if we want to discuss the topic rationally and logically we have to start talking in a more open and honest fashion. So the patriarchy is something that has been made up in someone's head. That is a factual comment. It doesn't exist in a mathematical formula and it can't be proven.

So you can't state whether I like it or not we live in a patriarchy. I completely disagree with this comment. I'd argue that the social system that we have is complex and there are lots of parts that are dominated via extreme leftist feminist (I think I'm more a middle left person) viewpoints.

You can easily avoid white male dominated stuff. That is a cop out.


steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
It blows my mind how many of my fellow Straight Middle-Aged White Guys (SMAWGs, so close to the Hobbit dragon!) don't see their own privilege. I think they are just afraid of being replaced, or "losing" to women and PoC. It's like SMAWGs have been the collective king of the hill for so long, and they're scared and furious that the end could come NOW, during their lifetime. I mean, after all, what are the odds of that? It's not fair!!

And I guess it's human nature to desperately guard what you think is yours.

I know what it's like to lose. To feel so desperately that you're right, yet to fail nonetheless. Itís frightening. Turns the legs to jelly. I ask you, to what end? Dread it. Run from it. Destiny arrives all the same. And now, it's here. Or should I say, women and PoC are.

Since I seem to be the bad white man I think I'd add some perspective here. My wife is asian, my kids are clearly half white and half asian. I have friends that are gay including females that are gay. I work with minorities and I am friends with them. I am not one little bit scared of losing anything to women. I'm a big fan of women and minorities having the same opportunities as myself and I see this occurring all the time. My gay female friend has the same job as myself and gets paid more than me. I'm good with it.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
Is it unreasonable to think of womens' expected activities as analogous to men's expected activities like taking out the trash, getting out of bed at night when a sound is heard, fixing things around the house, cleaning out the gutters, changing the tire when it goes flat, etc?

And is it unreasonable to think of womens' unrequested emotional labor as analogous to mens' unrequested analytical labor when they nerd out and go above and beyond to, for example, engineer a sophisticated hydronic heating system, or dial in on the perfect thermostat settings for cost savings and comfort, or eliminate all air leaks in a house with weather stripping, etc? These things, like the emotional labor many women do, benefit others but aren't always requested and often seem to go unnoticed or in some cases teased as obsessive and/or nerdy behavior.

I guess I'm having a hard time seeing why women are uniquely unappreciated is why I mention this. I don't deny their emotional work is valuable and often underappreciated, but I can't help but see that men do many unrequested things that are valuable and often underappreciated as well - so I don't see this concept as particularly compelling.

Am I wrong in thinking these unrequested male behaviors are underappreciated by the opposite sex? Or am I wrong in thinking these behaviors are analogous because emotional labor is by its nature meant to benefit others, whereas mens' unrequested labor is only beneficial to others as a byproduct and is really meant to satisfy their own curiosity/obsession?

Yeah, I think there's an inherent sexism in the whole "well, yeah, but emotional labor (already coded as feminine) is kind of not all that important, so... it's reasonable that I as a man don't care about it." Unsurprising, though... Because patriarchy

The thing is this is your opinion and it's a confrontational opinion that I suggest most people would never even buy into. Same as the vast majority of people think the patriarchy is made up BS. I definitely don't think that the work that my mum or my wife does is emotional labour. I've never heard that term. I definitely don't view women as somehow incapable of doing whatever it is they want to do.

At the same time if women want to do most of the cooking or cleaning or whatever that is their choice and feminists don't have the right to impede on individual choices or cry that those individual choices are somehow wrong or reflective or a male conspiracy.

J Boogie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 879
Agreed. And that kind of brings us back to my initial take on OP's question, which is that men have historically had way more opportunities to do a wider variety of remarkable things that would cause someone to fan out over them. How many of these men that have a fan base are also stay at home parents?

Interesting question, since we are all chatting on the dude's website at the moment.

Ha! Nice one. But he really doesn't fit. There would be no following if he was a SAHP with a working spouse (who worked out of neccessity).

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
You don't have to fanboy the bad ones, you shouldn't fanboy the bad ones.  The point is that the good ones should get fanboyed.

I do this within reason. If a woman is achieving to a high level in any activity that I'm interested I think it's great. I don't ensure that I fanboy women and men equally. I don't make gender an issue. I don't fanboy many people either.

A good question is should everyone really be on this forum ? It was started by a man. Admittedly it was just one man but is this forum just another example of the patriarchy ? I don't believe in the patriarchy but can anyone who believes in the patriarchy and equal outcomes really frequent this webpage and/or forum. Should we all up and leave and go to a female run FIRE site ?

Everyone can use this forum as long as they follow the rules.

The forum is a part of the society in which we live and is therefore a part of the patriarchy.  That's unavoidable.  Basically, if you live here, you breathe in all the racism, sexism and every other bias that permeates our air.

We keep it from turning into a tool of the patriarchy by making sure that we acknowledge the existence of sexism and its effects on our society.  We should not pretend that sexism does not exist, nor pretend that men are not advantaged in our society.  We should know that women who reach the same level of achievement that men reach generally had to scale a number of extra barriers to get there.

By acknowledgement of those simple, obvious facts about our society, we make this forum a more open and welcoming place for everyone to learn about and discuss financial independence.  If we pretend sexism doesn't exist, or constantly demand some absurd level of proof regarding something so obvious, we'd make half the population feel like outsiders, and I have no desire to do that.

Toque.

You haven't stated one fact at all. You've stated your highly left wing opinion and tried to state it as a fact. It's not a fact. Prove anything that you stated.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3823
Is it unreasonable to think of womens' expected activities as analogous to men's expected activities like taking out the trash, getting out of bed at night when a sound is heard, fixing things around the house, cleaning out the gutters, changing the tire when it goes flat, etc?

And is it unreasonable to think of womens' unrequested emotional labor as analogous to mens' unrequested analytical labor when they nerd out and go above and beyond to, for example, engineer a sophisticated hydronic heating system, or dial in on the perfect thermostat settings for cost savings and comfort, or eliminate all air leaks in a house with weather stripping, etc? These things, like the emotional labor many women do, benefit others but aren't always requested and often seem to go unnoticed or in some cases teased as obsessive and/or nerdy behavior.

I guess I'm having a hard time seeing why women are uniquely unappreciated is why I mention this. I don't deny their emotional work is valuable and often underappreciated, but I can't help but see that men do many unrequested things that are valuable and often underappreciated as well - so I don't see this concept as particularly compelling.

Am I wrong in thinking these unrequested male behaviors are underappreciated by the opposite sex? Or am I wrong in thinking these behaviors are analogous because emotional labor is by its nature meant to benefit others, whereas mens' unrequested labor is only beneficial to others as a byproduct and is really meant to satisfy their own curiosity/obsession?

Yeah, I think there's an inherent sexism in the whole "well, yeah, but emotional labor (already coded as feminine) is kind of not all that important, so... it's reasonable that I as a man don't care about it." Unsurprising, though... Because patriarchy

The thing is this is your opinion and it's a confrontational opinion that I suggest most people would never even buy into. Same as the vast majority of people think the patriarchy is made up BS. I definitely don't think that the work that my mum or my wife does is emotional labour. I've never heard that term. I definitely don't view women as somehow incapable of doing whatever it is they want to do.

At the same time if women want to do most of the cooking or cleaning or whatever that is their choice and feminists don't have the right to impede on individual choices or cry that those individual choices are somehow wrong or reflective or a male conspiracy.

One individual person's knowledge of a thing doesn't do anything to prove whether or not that thing exists.

There are many people who don't know of the Dunning-Kruger Effect, for example. Coincidentally, lack of knowledge of it seems to correlate somewhat with being afflicted by it.

tyort1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2210
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
Steveo if we donít live in a patriarchy, then how do you account for the vast disparity in wealth/success/power in our society?

If itís not societally driven, the only other option is to take the stance that women just suck at careers?

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3210
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Steveo if we donít live in a patriarchy, then how do you account for the vast disparity in wealth/success/power in our society?

If itís not societally driven, the only other option is to take the stance that women just suck at careers?

Or that women willing sacrifice careers for other options, like having kids. 

I know many, many women who wish they could stay at home with their kids.  I know comparably few men who wish that.



Isn't this whole entire message board dedicated to the idea you don't have to and maybe shouldn't chase every dollar and ounce of power? 

RetiredAt63

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 10177
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada

A good question is should everyone really be on this forum ? It was started by a man. Admittedly it was just one man but is this forum just another example of the patriarchy ? I don't believe in the patriarchy but can anyone who believes in the patriarchy and equal outcomes really frequent this webpage and/or forum. Should we all up and leave and go to a female run FIRE site ?

LOLOL.  So silly.  It's a good thing I wasn't drinking anything when I read this.

Why is it silly ?

This is like trying to explain why a joke is funny.

We are talking about how in general men are more likely to fanboy men than women while women do it equally (or that is where we started). 

So there is nothing inherently wrong with liking his blog or this forum.  The point is that would people equally appreciate a similar blog if a woman was writing it?  And we won't know unless someone can go out and dig up a similar blog written by a woman.  And even then that is n=1 (here n = # pairs being compared).

"Patriarchy" these days (I'm not a sociologist so I am sure they have a much more complete and accurate definition) is basically shorthand for all the ways that our present society is shaped by the history of privileged men dominating society, to the point that their viewpoint was internalized by everyone.  Some things still stand out - abortion laws in the US for one (and so glad Henry Morgentaler bucked Canada's criminal code).  Most of it is internalized - why do women picket abortion clinics, when they or their daughters could potentially need abortions?   I don't know, but it is a question worth asking, and maybe there are some answers to that one.  But basically I would guess that they have internalized the social value that a man's opinion (her husbands or father's) matters more than her own.

The thing is that internalized values are not obvious.  I read of a study once where teachers were sure that they were giving equal time to speak up and ask questions in class to all their students, but when classes were videotaped they were consistently giving more time to the boys.  They were shocked, it was not what they planned to do or wanted to do.  But it was happening.  I'm sure sociologists have lots of examples of this, where we have no idea our behaviour has been shaped, but it has been shaped.  Sometimes it is obvious.  The time I got into absolutely the most trouble with my parents was when I got into a fight with the boy next door.  I lost of course, I had no idea how to fight and he did, but he was bullying his sister, my friend (he bullied all his sisters as a matter of course and his parents did nothing about it), and I finally called him on it.  I got no sympathy from my parents, girls don't fight.  No matter what.  And even with all the girls taking martial arts classes, and involved in more active sports, there is a lot more fuss made about sports-related injuries than there is for the boys getting the same injuries.  Not because the damage is more, but because somehow our bodies are not supposed to get injured.  Even though we can have babies, which is physically and physiologically incredibly difficult.  But we are supposed to have babies, we aren't supposed to break a finger in karate or a leg falling out of a tree. 

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6344
Steveo if we donít live in a patriarchy, then how do you account for the vast disparity in wealth/success/power in our society?

If itís not societally driven, the only other option is to take the stance that women just suck at careers?

Or that women willing sacrifice careers for other options, like having kids. 

I know many, many women who wish they could stay at home with their kids.  I know comparably few men who wish that.




Isn't this whole entire message board dedicated to the idea you don't have to and maybe shouldn't chase every dollar and ounce of power?

But why is that do you think?  Women are just more nurturing?  Sometimes maybe.

But maybe...
- it's the fact that we get paid less
- it's the fact that in the US anyway, maternity/ paternity leave sucks - and childbirth is something you have to recover from.  And breastfeeding/ pumping ain't a picnic either.
- it's the fact that we are -ahem- *expected* to take on more of the at home duties and more of the unpaid brain labor.
- it's the fact that we are treated differently at work.  Fewer opportunities for advancement and raises.  We are demonized for asking for more money.  If you are outspoken, you are a "bitch" instead of "assertive".  (I'm not making all this up, of course.  Studies about this exist.)

These are intertwined in a way that you cannot just draw a line.  My job is the "lesser" job.  I'm slightly more likely to take time off for the kids, or pick them up if they get sick, or stay home if they are sick.  But that's BECAUSE I hit the ceiling and my pay hit the ceiling at work.  I didn't *choose* this path - it just got too tiring and too frustrating to continually fight for more.  It's EXHAUSTING.  (It's especially depressing when you see the ONLY female director at the company be "let go" because of personality reasons.  The only thing about her personality?  In meetings and in interactions, she "acted like a man".  She was assertive.  All of the complaints about her were of this nature.  The men at her level who are the same way (or way worse?) Still here.  Still getting promoted.)


My husband doesn't want to stay home with the kids, but neither do I.  We'd both love to work part time though.

Nick_Miller

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 897
It blows my mind how many of my fellow Straight Middle-Aged White Guys (SMAWGs, so close to the Hobbit dragon!) don't see their own privilege. I think they are just afraid of being replaced, or "losing" to women and PoC. It's like SMAWGs have been the collective king of the hill for so long, and they're scared and furious that the end could come NOW, during their lifetime. I mean, after all, what are the odds of that? It's not fair!!

And I guess it's human nature to desperately guard what you think is yours.

I know what it's like to lose. To feel so desperately that you're right, yet to fail nonetheless. Itís frightening. Turns the legs to jelly. I ask you, to what end? Dread it. Run from it. Destiny arrives all the same. And now, it's here. Or should I say, women and PoC are.

Since I seem to be the bad white man I think I'd add some perspective here. My wife is asian, my kids are clearly half white and half asian. I have friends that are gay including females that are gay. I work with minorities and I am friends with them. I am not one little bit scared of losing anything to women. I'm a big fan of women and minorities having the same opportunities as myself and I see this occurring all the time. My gay female friend has the same job as myself and gets paid more than me. I'm good with it.

You realize I was quoting Thanos from Avengers: Infinity War, right?

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
Is it unreasonable to think of womens' expected activities as analogous to men's expected activities like taking out the trash, getting out of bed at night when a sound is heard, fixing things around the house, cleaning out the gutters, changing the tire when it goes flat, etc?

And is it unreasonable to think of womens' unrequested emotional labor as analogous to mens' unrequested analytical labor when they nerd out and go above and beyond to, for example, engineer a sophisticated hydronic heating system, or dial in on the perfect thermostat settings for cost savings and comfort, or eliminate all air leaks in a house with weather stripping, etc? These things, like the emotional labor many women do, benefit others but aren't always requested and often seem to go unnoticed or in some cases teased as obsessive and/or nerdy behavior.

I guess I'm having a hard time seeing why women are uniquely unappreciated is why I mention this. I don't deny their emotional work is valuable and often underappreciated, but I can't help but see that men do many unrequested things that are valuable and often underappreciated as well - so I don't see this concept as particularly compelling.

Am I wrong in thinking these unrequested male behaviors are underappreciated by the opposite sex? Or am I wrong in thinking these behaviors are analogous because emotional labor is by its nature meant to benefit others, whereas mens' unrequested labor is only beneficial to others as a byproduct and is really meant to satisfy their own curiosity/obsession?

Yeah, I think there's an inherent sexism in the whole "well, yeah, but emotional labor (already coded as feminine) is kind of not all that important, so... it's reasonable that I as a man don't care about it." Unsurprising, though... Because patriarchy

The thing is this is your opinion and it's a confrontational opinion that I suggest most people would never even buy into. Same as the vast majority of people think the patriarchy is made up BS. I definitely don't think that the work that my mum or my wife does is emotional labour. I've never heard that term. I definitely don't view women as somehow incapable of doing whatever it is they want to do.

At the same time if women want to do most of the cooking or cleaning or whatever that is their choice and feminists don't have the right to impede on individual choices or cry that those individual choices are somehow wrong or reflective or a male conspiracy.

One individual person's knowledge of a thing doesn't do anything to prove whether or not that thing exists.

There are many people who don't know of the Dunning-Kruger Effect, for example. Coincidentally, lack of knowledge of it seems to correlate somewhat with being afflicted by it.

I don't think you are getting where I am coming from. I'll try and explain this. The patriarchy is a theory of social organisation. It is something that cannot be backed up by hard facts. It's a Marxist way of viewing the world. So you come up with a theory of how social interaction has evolved and try and state it happened because of some factor other than natural evolution. There is some controlling force at work creating the social structure.

It's not a hard fact based theory that can be proven mathematically.

It's pretty easy and it should be accepted that anyone who believes in the patriarchy has an opinion of social organisations that cannot be backed up by facts that prove it's existence.

I think accepting this is the first step to rational discussions. Then you can get into details and see quite clearly that not everything is about the patriarchy. Then if there are issues with discrimination or anything like that we as a society can do something about it.

The problem is when you see the patriarchy everywhere and you fail to realise that there are lots of other factors at play.

Sailor Sam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4039
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Steel Beach
  • Semper...something
...there are lots of other factors at play.

Please show us the mathematical proof of these 'other' factors that can be proven mathematically. I will be legitimate fascinated.   

shenlong55

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 486
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Kentucky
I don't think you are getting where I am coming from. I'll try and explain this. The patriarchy is a theory of social organisation. It is something that cannot be backed up by hard facts. It's a Marxist way of viewing the world. So you come up with a theory of how social interaction has evolved and try and state it happened because of some factor other than natural evolution. There is some controlling force at work creating the social structure.

It's not a hard fact based theory that can be proven mathematically.

It's pretty easy and it should be accepted that anyone who believes in the patriarchy has an opinion of social organisations that cannot be backed up by facts that prove it's existence.

I think accepting this is the first step to rational discussions. Then you can get into details and see quite clearly that not everything is about the patriarchy. Then if there are issues with discrimination or anything like that we as a society can do something about it.

The problem is when you see the patriarchy everywhere and you fail to realise that there are lots of other factors at play.

Can I ask again that you explain how you are defining the term patriarchy?  Because it seems to me as if you are using a completely different definition from most other people here and it's really pointless to talk about it if you're not even in agreement about what the term means.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
Steveo if we donít live in a patriarchy, then how do you account for the vast disparity in wealth/success/power in our society?

If itís not societally driven, the only other option is to take the stance that women just suck at careers?

I don't think dramatising the situation works. So when you talk about the vast disparity in wealth/success/power in our society I don't think that you are being honest about the current situation. Women get to vote, they get paid typically the same amount for the same work, they get access to education etc. We aren't talking about any form of overt discrimination here are we ? If we are then I'm on the side of getting rid of that discrimination.

Women don't just suck at careers. They can be great. The thing is women get to make their choices and we have to let them. I've given examples in this thread but I'll give some more.

1. At my gym there is a guy who is close to finishing his degree and becoming an Anaesthetist. His wife is also a doctor but a GP. She has chosen though to work part time. That is her choice.
2. There is another young couple who have both just finished their medical degrees and the wife (she also trains jiu-jitsu) has told me she intends to become an Anaesthetist.
3. I think the best boss that I had was female. She has had a great career. She has managed several large IT departments. She would have earned really good money. She was fantastic. She was also a single mum and I assume she had to work to support herself and her child.

So here is the kicker - people get to make individual choices and the outcome is the outcome. You can't control it.

I think all society can do (all we can do) is provide fair and reasonable opportunities to everyone and give it some time. I think the problem with people who believe in the patriarchy is that they are jumping at shadows.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
Or that women willing sacrifice careers for other options, like having kids. 

I know many, many women who wish they could stay at home with their kids.  I know comparably few men who wish that.

My wife works part time and earns considerably less than me. She also does most of the work around the house. She chooses that and that isn't just me stating that. When we have family dinners/events she is always tidying up while my brothers wives tend to do nothing.

My wife would prefer not to work at all but I won't allow this as I believe the patriarchy is winning if I let her not work at all.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
In my mind, there is no question sexism, racism, etc. exist in our society (just look at the current president). But this is very different from saying there is systematic oppression going on (the connotation of patriarchy). Or, if patriarchy is not systematic but socially ingrained, that raises a whole host of new questions: What is the bar by which a society is deemed "patriarchal"? How does one measure this bar? Are there perhaps some innate differences (not intellectual, but biologically associated with raising children) that make some difference in burden of labor between the sexes advantageous to "patriarchal" societies, or even preferential to some large percentage of members within that society (so that by Bayesian inference, 50/50 is no longer a representative sample based on preference to lead)?

So, I have to disagree that this "forum... is part of the patriarchy...", and that this is "a simple, obvious fact".** The struggle for achievement and equality will and always has been a struggle by both sexes to determine the most advantageous setup, both individually and socially (and these have many competing objectives).

Great post. We live in a complex system and people stating it's a patriarchy really need to come up with a lot more facts (which they can't) than just telling us it exists because I say it exists.

People work together to create a system that works for them. If people are clearly discriminated against I will take a stand against that but equality of outcome is not the basis to discuss discrimination.

partgypsy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2860
You don't have to fanboy the bad ones, you shouldn't fanboy the bad ones.  The point is that the good ones should get fanboyed.

I do this within reason. If a woman is achieving to a high level in any activity that I'm interested I think it's great. I don't ensure that I fanboy women and men equally. I don't make gender an issue. I don't fanboy many people either.

A good question is should everyone really be on this forum ? It was started by a man. Admittedly it was just one man but is this forum just another example of the patriarchy ? I don't believe in the patriarchy but can anyone who believes in the patriarchy and equal outcomes really frequent this webpage and/or forum. Should we all up and leave and go to a female run FIRE site ?

Everyone can use this forum as long as they follow the rules.

The forum is a part of the society in which we live and is therefore a part of the patriarchy.  That's unavoidable.  Basically, if you live here, you breathe in all the racism, sexism and every other bias that permeates our air.

We keep it from turning into a tool of the patriarchy by making sure that we acknowledge the existence of sexism and its effects on our society.  We should not pretend that sexism does not exist, nor pretend that men are not advantaged in our society.  We should know that women who reach the same level of achievement that men reach generally had to scale a number of extra barriers to get there.

By acknowledgement of those simple, obvious facts about our society, we make this forum a more open and welcoming place for everyone to learn about and discuss financial independence.  If we pretend sexism doesn't exist, or constantly demand some absurd level of proof regarding something so obvious, we'd make half the population feel like outsiders, and I have no desire to do that.

Toque.

Thank you. I don't think I'm going to contribute to this thread anymore.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2019, 08:51:31 PM by partgypsy »

Sailor Sam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4039
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Steel Beach
  • Semper...something
In my mind, there is no question sexism, racism, etc. exist in our society (just look at the current president). But this is very different from saying there is systematic oppression going on (the connotation of patriarchy). Or, if patriarchy is not systematic but socially ingrained, that raises a whole host of new questions: What is the bar by which a society is deemed "patriarchal"? How does one measure this bar? Are there perhaps some innate differences (not intellectual, but biologically associated with raising children) that make some difference in burden of labor between the sexes advantageous to "patriarchal" societies, or even preferential to some large percentage of members within that society (so that by Bayesian inference, 50/50 is no longer a representative sample based on preference to lead)?

So, I have to disagree that this "forum... is part of the patriarchy...", and that this is "a simple, obvious fact".** The struggle for achievement and equality will and always has been a struggle by both sexes to determine the most advantageous setup, both individually and socially (and these have many competing objectives).

Great post. We live in a complex system and people stating it's a patriarchy really need to come up with a lot more facts (which they can't) than just telling us it exists because I say it exists.

People work together to create a system that works for them. If people are clearly discriminated against I will take a stand against that but equality of outcome is not the basis to discuss discrimination.

And that system can be proven with MATH (do do doooooo)! Please provide.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
It blows my mind how many of my fellow Straight Middle-Aged White Guys (SMAWGs, so close to the Hobbit dragon!) don't see their own privilege. I think they are just afraid of being replaced, or "losing" to women and PoC. It's like SMAWGs have been the collective king of the hill for so long, and they're scared and furious that the end could come NOW, during their lifetime. I mean, after all, what are the odds of that? It's not fair!!

And I guess it's human nature to desperately guard what you think is yours.

I know what it's like to lose. To feel so desperately that you're right, yet to fail nonetheless. Itís frightening. Turns the legs to jelly. I ask you, to what end? Dread it. Run from it. Destiny arrives all the same. And now, it's here. Or should I say, women and PoC are.

Since I seem to be the bad white man I think I'd add some perspective here. My wife is asian, my kids are clearly half white and half asian. I have friends that are gay including females that are gay. I work with minorities and I am friends with them. I am not one little bit scared of losing anything to women. I'm a big fan of women and minorities having the same opportunities as myself and I see this occurring all the time. My gay female friend has the same job as myself and gets paid more than me. I'm good with it.

You realize I was quoting Thanos from Avengers: Infinity War, right?

Apologies if I reacted the wrong way. I am part of the patriarchy.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
Literally the fact that there is still a debate over abortion and birth control is evidence of laws that favour men over women. Until women have the full right to control what happens to their own bodies, both in preventing and ending unwanted pregnancies, there is not equality in America (or most other countries in the world). There is no law equivalent that controls what men can do with their bodies, and the fact that viagra is funded by insurance companies without question while the supreme court decides if birth control can be excluded is a vast inequality and glaring symbol of the patriarchy.

I live in a democracy where women can have abortions and there are not problems with it. Maybe this is the issue. I don't live in a patriarchy but maybe America is a backwards country that still hasn't evolved compared to Australia.

I probably live in a matriarchy though because men are really effected by the society that I live in. Men commit suicide 3 times more than women. That is a sad indictment on the matriarchy and the effect it is having on men. We are being slowly but surely screwed over and we are responding to this poor treatment in bad ways. Men also tend to die at a younger age than women. These are real statistics that prove that the matriarchy is really bad in Australia.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2019, 10:02:36 PM by steveo »

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944

A good question is should everyone really be on this forum ? It was started by a man. Admittedly it was just one man but is this forum just another example of the patriarchy ? I don't believe in the patriarchy but can anyone who believes in the patriarchy and equal outcomes really frequent this webpage and/or forum. Should we all up and leave and go to a female run FIRE site ?

LOLOL.  So silly.  It's a good thing I wasn't drinking anything when I read this.

Why is it silly ?

This is like trying to explain why a joke is funny.

We are talking about how in general men are more likely to fanboy men than women while women do it equally (or that is where we started). 

So there is nothing inherently wrong with liking his blog or this forum.  The point is that would people equally appreciate a similar blog if a woman was writing it?  And we won't know unless someone can go out and dig up a similar blog written by a woman.  And even then that is n=1 (here n = # pairs being compared).

"Patriarchy" these days (I'm not a sociologist so I am sure they have a much more complete and accurate definition) is basically shorthand for all the ways that our present society is shaped by the history of privileged men dominating society, to the point that their viewpoint was internalized by everyone.  Some things still stand out - abortion laws in the US for one (and so glad Henry Morgentaler bucked Canada's criminal code).  Most of it is internalized - why do women picket abortion clinics, when they or their daughters could potentially need abortions?   I don't know, but it is a question worth asking, and maybe there are some answers to that one.  But basically I would guess that they have internalized the social value that a man's opinion (her husbands or father's) matters more than her own.

The thing is that internalized values are not obvious.  I read of a study once where teachers were sure that they were giving equal time to speak up and ask questions in class to all their students, but when classes were videotaped they were consistently giving more time to the boys.  They were shocked, it was not what they planned to do or wanted to do.  But it was happening.  I'm sure sociologists have lots of examples of this, where we have no idea our behaviour has been shaped, but it has been shaped.  Sometimes it is obvious.  The time I got into absolutely the most trouble with my parents was when I got into a fight with the boy next door.  I lost of course, I had no idea how to fight and he did, but he was bullying his sister, my friend (he bullied all his sisters as a matter of course and his parents did nothing about it), and I finally called him on it.  I got no sympathy from my parents, girls don't fight.  No matter what.  And even with all the girls taking martial arts classes, and involved in more active sports, there is a lot more fuss made about sports-related injuries than there is for the boys getting the same injuries.  Not because the damage is more, but because somehow our bodies are not supposed to get injured.  Even though we can have babies, which is physically and physiologically incredibly difficult.  But we are supposed to have babies, we aren't supposed to break a finger in karate or a leg falling out of a tree.

In all seriousness this is really drawing a long long bow to make a point. Some of that stuff I also don't think is true at all. I mean I've never worried about my mum or women in general getting injured more than a man being injured. If I'm not the one injured my care factor is reasonably low.

So there is nothing inherently wrong with liking his blog or this forum.  The point is that would people equally appreciate a similar blog if a woman was writing it?  And we won't know unless someone can go out and dig up a similar blog written by a woman.  And even then that is n=1 (here n = # pairs being compared).

Exactly. So we have to stop seeing the patriarchy everywhere. People get to make their own decisions. We have to accept that the outcome of society is based on lots of individuals making their own decisions. They might make from your point of view the wrong decision but you (feminists) don't get to tell the rest of society that they have to live by their rules.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1944
...there are lots of other factors at play.

Please show us the mathematical proof of these 'other' factors that can be proven mathematically. I will be legitimate fascinated.

I can't and no one can. It's all opinions and highly subjective opinions. That is the point.

People who believe in the patriarchy for some reason though can't view this rationally or logically. If a man earns more money it's the patriarchy when it could be he was smarter, quicker or better in so may different ways than those he was competing against. If women don't do what they consider to be the right thing it's the patriarchy when it could be so many different factors guiding their decisions.

The problem with Marxist doctrines in general is that you see stuff everywhere. I think it's a warped way of viewing the world. You place too much importance on your key theory of everything that other factors just sort of get hidden in the background.

I'd love to see the argument about why men commit suicide more. The answer will probably be the patriarchy hurts everyone but that is a cop out.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2019, 10:09:56 PM by steveo »

nnls

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1156
  • Location: Perth, AU
...there are lots of other factors at play.

Please show us the mathematical proof of these 'other' factors that can be proven mathematically. I will be legitimate fascinated.

I can't and no one can. It's all opinions and highly subjective opinions. That is the point.

People who believe in the patriarchy for some reason though can't view this rationally or logically. If a man earns more money it's the patriarchy when it could be he was smarter, quicker or better in so may different ways than those he was competing against. If women don't do what they consider to be the right thing it's the patriarchy when it could be so many different factors guiding their decisions.

The problem with Marxist doctrines in general is that you see stuff everywhere. I think it's a warped way of viewing the world. You place too much importance on your key theory of everything that other factors just sort of get hidden in the background.

I'd love to see the argument about why men commit suicide more. The answer will probably be the patriarchy hurts everyone but that is a cop out.

well it partially is, as people have said above due to patriarchy in general "masculine" traits are valued and "feminine" traits are not. So opening up about your feelings and talking about them are seeing as feminine so many men dont feel comfortable talking about their stress and anxiety and depression, because this is seen as weak.

Patriarchy can negatively affect men as well as woman

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
I would like to take a step back here for a second.

What's the central point of contention here? On one side we have a group of people claiming that there's a complex and insidious system of social norms, expectations, stereotypes, and just-so stories that hampers the full flourishing of women as a class. That group agrees that the system is not a conspiracy and has no leaders; instead, it is self-perpetuating. On the other side we have a group of people claiming that it's self-evident that there can be no such system. They cite various reasons: "I've never noticed it"; "women in my personal and professional sphere seem to be fine"; "math"; and the big winner, "women and men are just naturally different, so of course they'll have different social roles and there's nothing wrong with that because nature."

Let's take a step back even further. Historically, there are many, many examples of societies treating women as a lesser class of human. In all cases, this treatment has been justified by an appeal to "nature." Here's a non-comprehensive list:

1. Women are chattel
2. Women's bodies should be available for the purchase of sex
3. Women should cover their heads
4. Women should leave the neighborhood when they menstruate
5. Women should have their clitorises removed
6. Women can't own property
7. Women can't vote
8. Women can't apply for men's jobs
9. Women get fired when they get pregnant
10. Women routinely face domestic violence
11. Women have to see a doctor every year to get birth control
12. Women don't have a say in when they can terminate their own pregnancy
13. Women are brutalized in violent pornography
14. Women are sexually objectified in art and popular culture
15. Women are expected to shoulder household work and childcare in intimate relationships

Allowing for differences across centuries and cultures, all of these have been true at some point. Right now, in American society, I'd say that 2 and 10 - 15 are still true.

If you asked your average bro how they can justify, say, 2 or 14 or 15, they would probably produce some garbage evolutionary argument, that men and women are just "like that" and therefore fighting against it is hopeless. But here's the thing: If you asked your average 10th-century bro how they can justify 1 or 3 or 6, they'd say exactly the same thing. Yet, here in the 21st century, we recognize that the 10th-century bros were wrong and there's nothing "natural" or "innate" about women being chattel or being forbidden to own property or go bare-headed. So why, for fuck's sake, do we allow that 21st-century bros have the right of anything at all to suggest that women being exploited for sexual and reproductive and household and emotional labor is somehow "natural" or "innate" and therefore Į\_(ツ)_/Į? I mean, we've been evolving as a society to treat everyone more equally for centuries, and then all of a sudden we hit 2019 and oops, we're done now, everything's set in stone and must be the inevitable result of millennia of human evolution?

A comment: Please do not react to this by saying something along the lines of "women can vote now!" I know that. That is, in fact, precisely my point.

Again: Do not confuse what is with what should be. They are not the same.

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Women are exempt from registering for the Selective Service but men aren't. Those drafted in the past weren't allowed to choose what to do with their bodies.

[...] men made those rules, and men could change them.

Thank you.

gooki

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2357
  • Location: NZ
Quote
Why do so few men "follow/fanboy/support" women, when the reverse is not.

 Because weíre taught itís not socially acceptable to stalk women.

That and many a man has felt the jealous wrath of our partners for appreciating other women.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2019, 12:39:49 AM by gooki »

nnls

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1156
  • Location: Perth, AU
Quote
Why do so few men "follow/fanboy/support" women, when the reverse is not.

 Because weíre taught itís not socially acceptable to stalk women.

That and many a man has felt the jealous wrath of our partners for appreciating other women.

Your wife would be jealous if you were a fan of a woman sport star and wanted to go watch them play?

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4025
  • Location: Avalon

I don't think you are getting where I am coming from.

I think a number of us get exactly where you are coming from.