Originally posted by halfoldman
reply to post by sliceNodice
I think that one should make a distinction between being "male" (biologically male) and the changing constructs of "masculinity".
If "male" means an aggressive dominator over women, and colonized peoples or even the environment, then yes, we have changed much, and even
religious Western concepts of masculinity have become less violent and hurtful since the 1970-1980s.
However, the construct of masculinity can still change much for the better.
I do like the fact that expectations for both sexes are starting to loosen up.
We are so much more than just male or female, and should be able to express out true natures without so much stereotyping. This threatens some males
who want a stereotyped environment, but it also means men are less likely to have to be the sole bread-winner, and men who are not so macho can more
easily fit in.
When hardcore extremists talk about wiping out "biological men" they lose me completely, and I think it is them that need help to overcome
their prejudices in such cases.
Agreed, that attitude is just sick.
However the nearest thing I've seen to it was in a Melbourne suburb, where a group of macho guys were busily trying to exterminate gay males, by
dropping them off St Kilda Pier. - while police carefully looked in the other direction.
I wonder where the author of this thread would have stood in that situation.
However, in global masculinity studies it becomes clear that male identity is expected to change, but yet female/liberal attitudes towards men
do not. Men are still exclusive battle "canon fodder", and are expected to make all kinds of sacrifices that women do not.
There are a lot of women trying to put a stop to wars to protect males from being cannon fodder. There are others fighting for the right to fight on
the front lines, beside the men. And in WWII, despite women not fighting on the front lines, their jobs as nurses and flak gun operators meant many
were killed in the line of duty.
What other sacrifices do you mean? I promise you, as a single mother with handicapped children, I've sacrificed opportunities, I've sacrificed my
social life, I've lived most of my life with no disposable income, unable to afford shoes, glasses or even a mattress at first, having to buy
underwear from a second hand shop and scavenge for food, and hardly sleeping for years because a chronically ill child needed to be watched at night.
I don't want sympathy, I'm not exceptional. I'm just one of many women who've lived this very female type of sacrifice.
Of course, as a Liberal (as in left-wing) mother of wonderful sons, the idea of young men being killed in a war they are too naive to understand
horrifies me.
Men still perform most of the dirtiest, most dangerous and traumatic work - affrimative action should place more women into positions like
garbage men or scaffold workers, and more men should be made secretaries until the amounts are 50/50%. This will also equal out the death rates
between the genders in the NWO system, since currently the male life expectancy is 10-20 years less than that of women! Whatever the role of biology,
that alone is indicative of an oppressed male gender.
Equality is not "a room of one's own" for one gender, and a "Vietnam body bag" for the male gender. Society wants equality, but still pushes men
into stereotypical positions where they must sacrifice themselves for both male and female politics.
More men used to be secretaries. It was the new typewriters and increased typing speeds that pushed them out of that profession. Few could keep up.
A woman wanting to be a garbo will be just laughed at when she applies for a job at the council. Not only do garbos have to be fit and strong, but
they have to be one of a pretty rough-talking crew. And some people are still under the impression that swear words make female ears bleed.
Scaffold workers also have to be very strong. And there's no denying that the average man is quite a bit stronger than the average woman.
If a man wants to keep out of these professions, what's to stop him, these days, working somewhere more to his tastes? However don't bank on a more
gentle job necessarily being safer. With all the chemicals used in hair-dressing, for example, I wouldn't be surprised if that job kills more people
than scaffold work.
The changing position of women in society has meant that men are less stereotyped, and women are more likely to be working with them, sharing their
dangers. There are many women working on building sites and in abattoirs, for instance, in Australia. It has also meant that a woman doing draughting
is now called a draughtsman, and paid the same wage as the men working on her level, unlike the days when I was labelled a "tracer", and paid 1/4
the income of the surrounding males, despite doing more advanced work than they could do.
Regarding life expectancy, if you want these evened out we'll need to force women to drink and smoke as much as men do and to eat the same diet.
On an average women eat less meat and more vegetables than men and have healthier lifestyles. Just look in the average Aussie pub and you'll see a
horde of men men committing slow, communal suicide.
I can't see it happening 
) who were saying, all war is men's fault, all crime is
men's fault blah blah blah. 
