Men’s lack of adventure

[steamman]

In the U.K., there was the worthy Unicef soccer aid match on TV last night. Two presenters, Dermot O Leary and Alex Scott, the latter an ex England women’s football player. There was a picture of O Leary and Scott in women’s health magazine today, and the article was all about Scott’s dress, a red midi skin tight latex number.

She looked utterly amazing in it (and the article gushed over it), but what struck more was the contrast in the demeanour of her co presenter: stood there in an utterly drab boring suit that is instantly forgettable. It does make me wonder when men will finally wake up and realise what they are missing out on? Or maybe forgettable is what most men want: to be seen but not noticed? Despite all the talk of gender fluid fashion, I see no signs of it. A male TV presenter wearing a skirt or a dress would make a big impression. It’s about time the guys allowed themselves to be peacocks! Women have had it all their own way for far too long. That’s not their fault though. Men are their own worst enemies.

[Barleymower]

In the U.K., there was the worthy Unicef soccer aid match on TV last night. Two presenters, Dermot O Leary and Alex Scott, the latter an ex England women’s football player. There was a picture of O Leary and Scott in women’s health magazine today, and the article was all about Scott’s dress, a red midi skin tight latex number.

She looked utterly amazing in it (and the article gushed over it), but what struck more was the contrast in the demeanour of her co presenter: stood there in an utterly drab boring suit that is instantly forgettable. It does make me wonder when men will finally wake up and realise what they are missing out on? Or maybe forgettable is what most men want: to be seen but not noticed? Despite all the talk of gender fluid fashion, I see no signs of it. A male TV presenter wearing a skirt or a dress would make a big impression. It’s about time the guys allowed themselves to be peacocks! Women have had it all their own way for far too long. That’s not their fault though. Men are their own worst enemies.

https://medium.com/swlh/wtf-is-so-funny ... 32435ff692

I think society is slowly working through the conundrum but it going take time.

[crfriend]

I think society is slowly working through the conundrum but it going take time.

I think it's all going to depend on the time-line. If "acceptance" comes before the backlash to trans-* then we've got a chance, otherwise, never, or at least not in any of our lifetimes.

[Barleymower]

I think society is slowly working through the conundrum but it going take time.

I think it's all going to depend on the time-line. If "acceptance" comes before/ the backlash to trans-* then we've got a chance, otherwise, never, or at least not in none of our lifetimes.

It's an interesting article. Written from a womens perspective..uncomfortable reading but I feel well reasoned - in places. I would take some more convincing to buy into the whole hierarchy structure with homosexual women at the bottom of the pile.

I found the article are googling what kind of man laughs at a boy in dress? I googled it because it happened today. My next neighbour laughed out loud at my son who was playing in the garden in a dress.
I wasnt there abd my son was unfazed thankfully.
But seriously what kind of man laughs out loud at a child and calls himself a man?

[Myopic Bookworm]

It's an interesting article. Written from a womens perspective..uncomfortable reading but I feel well reasoned - in places. I would take some more convincing to buy into the whole hierarchy structure with homosexual women at the bottom of the pile.

I agree: but I think the hierarchy is intended as a thought-provoker, not as a serious theory of society. (The low position of feminist women in the hierarchy is clearly a sarcastic dig at all those anti-woke, anti-liberal men. But there is still a section of society for whom men are always valued above women, and women valued only for their worth to men, so lesbians are viewed as essentially worthless.)

I found the article are googling what kind of man laughs at a boy in dress? I googled it because it happened today. My next neighbour laughed out loud at my son who was playing in the garden in a dress.
I wasnt there abd my son was unfazed thankfully.
But seriously what kind of man laughs out loud at a child and calls himself a man?

For some reason, the word "pathetic" comes to mind.

[crfriend]

But there is still a section of society for whom men are always valued above women, and women valued only for their worth to men, so lesbians are viewed as essentially worthless.)

Be careful with this line of thought, because right now it looks like the lesbian rad-fems are the ones in power now and are influencing public policy (depending on locale).

[Myopic Bookworm]

But there is still a section of society for whom men are always valued above women, and women valued only for their worth to men, so lesbians are viewed as essentially worthless.)

Be careful with this line of thought, because right now it looks like the lesbian rad-fems are the ones in power now and are influencing public policy (depending on locale).

And if lesbians are worthless, then to have a lesbian in power is a violation of the natural order, which dictates that power should be held by alpha males.

[ScotL]

And if lesbians are worthless, then to have a lesbian in power is a violation of the natural order, which dictates that power should be held by alpha males.

I’ve read that the millennials are the first generation where the children are not necessarily guaranteed to do better than their parents. The article stated that this meant there are a lot of people still living with their parents without jobs that assure upward mobility. And this reportedly has a really bad effect on their mental status as to their worth.

In the Olden days, men wear assumed to be leaders. Now with over half the college graduates being women, this assumed leadership is not recognized. And that strikes a blow to the ego of “alpha males” and May explain why certain doctrine today argues to go back to traditional family values of “father knows best.”

I for one am happy to see that many of the younger generation is way less interested in old traditional labels. They don’t have issues with women in leadership positions. Because let’s face it, when we disallow half the population from contributing, we are only half as good as we could be

[crfriend]

I’ve read that the millennials are the first generation where the children are not necessarily guaranteed to do better than their parents. The article stated that this meant there are a lot of people still living with their parents without jobs that assure upward mobility. And this reportedly has a really bad effect on their mental status as to their worth.

That actually started with the "Gen-X" generation that was just behind the "Boomer" generation, so it's been going on a good deal longer than with just the Millennials. I am technically a "Boomer" although I identify vastly more as Gen-X, so I've been watching this for a while -- and it's not been a pleasant sight.

[TSH]

In the Olden days, men wear assumed to be leaders. Now with over half the college graduates being women, this assumed leadership is not recognized. And that strikes a blow to the ego of “alpha males” and May explain why certain doctrine today argues to go back to traditional family values of “father knows best.”

I for one am happy to see that many of the younger generation is way less interested in old traditional labels. They don’t have issues with women in leadership positions. Because let’s face it, when we disallow half the population from contributing, we are only half as good as we could be

Wish this site had a voting system, just so I could create another account to specifically upvote this twice.

[Coder]

Wish this site had a voting system, just so I could create another account to specifically upvote this twice.

I have had this thought myself - but you know what? Most of the highly toxic places on the internet have a voting system. That “fact” alone makes me glad this site doesn’t have one.

[TSH]

Wish this site had a voting system, just so I could create another account to specifically upvote this twice.

I have had this thought myself - but you know what? Most of the highly toxic places on the internet have a voting system. That “fact” alone makes me glad this site doesn’t have one.

I've been to a few places without one, and they prove to be just as bad — if not, worse than the ones with a system which allows for providing feedback through an icon/arrow. I think moderation has a much larger effect on how Internet forums turn out.

[ScotL]

Wish this site had a voting system, just so I could create another account to specifically upvote this twice.

Thank you, I really appreciate your comment. It’s been a long day at work.

[ScotL]

I have had this thought myself - but you know what? Most of the highly toxic places on the internet have a voting system. That “fact” alone makes me glad this site doesn’t have one.

Interesting point. Voting in echo chambers likely will be like the proverbial preaching to the choir? You’re probably right. Perhaps when it’s too easy to make a vote (like on Twitter) people’s votes mean less? When you actually have to write something and think about it, guess it means more. And perhaps if it’s easy to just vote up or down, I wonder if it changes what we write. Some might look to post more to get votes than express substance. Just my opinion, mean no offense to anyone who thinks differently.

[Coder]

I have had this thought myself - but you know what? Most of the highly toxic places on the internet have a voting system. That “fact” alone makes me glad this site doesn’t have one.

Interesting point. Voting in echo chambers likely will be like the proverbial preaching to the choir? You’re probably right. Perhaps when it’s too easy to make a vote (like on Twitter) people’s votes mean less? When you actually have to write something and think about it, guess it means more. And perhaps if it’s easy to just vote up or down, I wonder if it changes what we write. Some might look to post more to get votes than express substance. Just my opinion, mean no offense to anyone who thinks differently.

I “worry” about two outcomes - voting could foster an echo chamber - where people post content specifically to get likes. This happens on Reddit all the time, and in my opinion is a big part of influencer culture on places like Instagram. Because of this, people may be afraid to voice an opinion that gets downvotes.

The other aspect is gauging engagement - if someone starts posting a lot and slowly their likes get less and less, there’s less “reward” to continue posting. Right now the only real clue are replies, and even that is somewhat meaningless.

One thing that could work - is a nomination system where inspiring quotes/screeds could be nominated as “quote of the month”, with some safeties built in so the same person doesn’t get picked every time. The post could be stickied, and the stickied post could be a historical record of all notable posts. Not sure this site has polling built in, but polling could be used to choose the one. Sounds like a lot of work, though!

I like the freeform nature of this place, the subtle disagreement, the philosophizing.