Harry Styles again

[jamie001]

Ditto this one Jamie. DROP THE HATE-SPEECH! We're all getting very, very tired of it.

CR please accept my apology. I will refrain from this type of speech on the Cafe. I really do not want to be banned from here because I value my membership here and have grown my wardrobe from being a part of this community for many years.

Jamie

[jamie001]

I agree with Jamie to a point. The same point has been made by others in the cafe and in the media: Men have boxed themselves in with the fear of being a sissy. Both men and women are keeping men boxed in, women because they say " it's a no from me" and men by being so afraid of being called a sissy. Mouse has found total freedom, so has victor and many others. I came out fighting but I'm finding it increasing difficult. My sensitivity to looks and sniggers is getting to me again. Living in Reading is not the same as London and I'm looking forward to moving away.

Where i disagree with him is his constant promoting women as superior and their ability to take what they want. I don't think theirs has been an easy road but they are reaping the benefits now after a long struggle. Women are not superior to men. Men chose to leave skirts and dresses behind. Women did not choose to leave trousers behind they were taken away. It's an important distinction.

Men are free to do as they please. If they were as tough as they say they could pick up any article of clothing and wear it if they wanted to. It's that simple and stick two fingers up at anyone who challenges them.

I completely agree with Barley’s post. I believe that many men would rather die than be called a Sissy. The reason is that the Man-Box Mindset has been passed down from generation to generation. I will provide a prime example that happens everyday in America. Little girls play with their brother’s trucks, football, and race cars. Parents giggle and say “look at how cute little jane is, she is a TomBoy”. On the other hand, when little Johnny plays with his sister’s dolls or makeup, the parents especially the father totally loses it and disciplines little Johnny for inappropriate behavior. Why don’t the parents instead say “look at little Johnny, he is such a cute sissy-boy or cute little jane-girl”. This is the double standard that is the root of the problem. Until this Man-Box standard changes, men in skirts will never be accepted because skirts are feminine, feminine is inferior, and it is degrading for any man to display feminine tendencies. This is the Man-Code that defines the Man-Box.

[Barleymower]

I agree with Jamie to a point. The same point has been made by others in the cafe and in the media: Men have boxed themselves in with the fear of being a sissy. Both men and women are keeping men boxed in, women because they say " it's a no from me" and men by being so afraid of being called a sissy. Mouse has found total freedom, so has victor and many others. I came out fighting but I'm finding it increasing difficult. My sensitivity to looks and sniggers is getting to me again. Living in Reading is not the same as London and I'm looking forward to moving away.

Where i disagree with him is his constant promoting women as superior and their ability to take what they want. I don't think theirs has been an easy road but they are reaping the benefits now after a long struggle. Women are not superior to men. Men chose to leave skirts and dresses behind. Women did not choose to leave trousers behind they were taken away. It's an important distinction.

Men are free to do as they please. If they were as tough as they say they could pick up any article of clothing and wear it if they wanted to. It's that simple and stick two fingers up at anyone who challenges them.

I completely agree with Barley’s post. I believe that many men would rather die than be called a Sissy. The reason is that the Man-Box Mindset has been passed down from generation to generation. I will provide a prime example that happens everyday in America. Little girls play with their brother’s trucks, football, and race cars. Parents giggle and say “look at how cute little jane is, she is a TomBoy”. On the other hand, when little Johnny plays with his sister’s dolls or makeup, the parents especially the father totally loses it and disciplines little Johnny for inappropriate behavior. Why don’t the parents instead say “look at little Johnny, he is such a cute sissy-boy or cute little jane-girl”. This is the double standard that is the root of the problem. Until this Man-Box standard changes, men in skirts will never be accepted because skirts are feminine, feminine is inferior, and it is degrading for any man to display feminine tendencies. This is the Man-Code that defines the Man-Box.

Almost Jamie and you are not alone with you views.

Listening to Grayson Perry he refers to himself as a transvestite. Are there female transvestites? Yes there are. Do people go around calling them transvestites? No they don't.

The word Sissy has negative conations. So don't use it. He's just a boy playing dolls or dress-up. No need to give what he's doing a name. Until we, all people can accept people are the same then we should drop all the naming.

[mr seamstress]

This stereo typing what boys can wear and what toys he should play with, can be fueling the shortage of those who become nurses and doctors. To me if you take away from boy who likes to play with dolls may have the protentional of becoming a nurse or doctor. I believe all these restrictions being put on boys is hampering the medical field. If a boy play with dolls does this show how he feels about caring for others? I believe it does. Today women want nothing to do with a nurse is male wear a dress that played with dolls as a boy. Why do women seeing this being wrong? They rather being in a hospital that is short of staff and not able to give her proper care. Restricting boys has it consequences. Who is going to tell women they maybe harming their own health by not accepting males as a nurse that likes to wear a dress. Any male that likes to wear dress is more likely not to enter in the medical field because he knows he isn't going to be accepted.

[jamie001]

Restricting boys to the Man-Box and giving them a Man-Card that defines the rules of the Man-Box is destroying men emotionally and mentally. They see women all around them that have total freedom of expression both emotionally and through fashion with essentially no restrictions. Women are encourage to adopt all different forms of masculine behavior and masculine dress. Men and boy watch while constantly living by the rules of the Man-Box because they fear the repercussions of being labeled a “Sissy”. The fear is overwhelming and the desire to conform to the Man-Box and prove their masculinity on a daily basis whether it’s through gay bashing or acts of bravado that may result in their early death. It is really a sad state of affairs. It is the underlying reason that men explode into fits of rage and go crazy with a gun resulting in the death of many innocent men, women, and children.

Man-Box conformity is destroying America and the world but the mindset will never change because of the thought process that men must be the opposite of feminine, stoic at all times, and clones of each other with the soldier mind-set so that they can fight wars and win! The president of China made comments that men are becoming to feminine and banned K-Pop music as a result.

I am happing being a GNC JaneGirl. When I was growing up, I was called a Nancy-Boy so often that I got to really like the name “Nancy”.

[crfriend]

This stereo typing what boys can wear and what toys he should play with, can be fueling the shortage of those who become nurses and doctors. To me if you take away from boy who likes to play with dolls may have the protentional of becoming a nurse or doctor. I believe all these restrictions being put on boys is hampering the medical field. If a boy play with dolls does this show how he feels about caring for others? I believe it does.

Vastly worse, I think, is the brutal de-emphasis on the Humanities and arts because of the saturation of "sports" to the exclusion of the "finer things in life". This has all sorts of knock-on consequences that likely spans the entire gamut of what the human experience is supposed to be, and further dumbs the populace down the level of farm animals.

Consider how much richer the life of a boy who understands music, can read -- and enjoy -- poetry, and appreciates art in general is than the boy who's done nothing more than "play" football, baseball, or hockey. And don't even get me going about the topic of blood-sports (e.g. boxing and beyond). Ritualised violence helps no-one.

And the tragic thing is that this has all been done in a very deliberate and calculated manner over the course of decades. Boys suffer the most from this, as well, because at least the girls get some exposure to the niceties of life rather than "constant combat" of the boys. We need to do better for our sons.

[rivegauche]

Though there is a lot of truth in the stereotyping described here, I think reality is more nuanced. If a woman dresses in a very masculine way most of the time she will probably be suspected of being gay - it is not true that there is zero criticism. Her masculinity will be more criticised by women than any associated perceived lesbianism.

Among educated adults, including men, things have moved on in the UK. We are more likely to judge issues from first principles than society's social expectations, which is why the UK has been transformed into a country that is possibly one of the most tolerant of racial and sexual minorities. We all know there are still social consequences for a male who wears a skirt so it has some way to go but these consequences are trivial compared with their counterparts of even 20 years ago. I genuinely believe we will get there, not least because of the massive changes in the attitudes of young people. In fact they have gone rather too far in that there are too many prepared to pour the most appalling hatred on any individual who has bee mildly gender critical. I disagree with the opinions of JK Rowling on gender but they hardly deserve death threats and the actors whose fortunes she made who have now turned on her are massively ungrateful creatures.

The UK tolerance changes are not universal and I fear that education is probably the main indicator rather than economic status. Even this is not infallible - some of those of the intolerant extreme right have been very well educated, or perhaps more accurately have been exposed to a very expensive education. And of course there will always be highly selective Bible-thumpers in any western country, which seems to be independent of education.

Slowly but surely the narrow-mindedness of society is being eroded and I remain optimistic. We can lead by example - we have seen instances of misogyny on this site - let's avoid this, people. Let's be better than this.

[TSH]

Though there is a lot of truth in the stereotyping described here, I think reality os more nuanced.

It could be. It's not often the case, though. People are generally simple-minded. People want things to stay "simple". People often think only within boxes. It's why for all the progress we've made, much of the world hasn't changed. When societal improvements are made, there's typically at least a caveat or two that undermines these developments.

I genuinely believe we will get there, not least because of the massive changes in the attitudes of young people. In fact they have gone rather too far in that there are too many prepared to pour the most appalling hatred on any individual who has bee mildly gender critical. I disagree with the opinions of JK Rowling on gender but they hardly deserve death threats and the actors whose fortunes she made who have now turned on her are massively ungrateful creatures.

Death threats over anything will always be extreme and distasteful, and while JK Rowling most certainly doesn't deserve such hateful speech thrown at her, she was more than just "mildly gender critical" in her tweets. And although it’s true she's responsible for the stories, the fame and money the HP cast earned can't all just be attributed to her, because we don't actually know how involved she was in the film adaptations of these stories.

The movies gave these actors/actresses their fortune; not the books, which were largely published by one person with maybe a small team of editors (if even that) to help polish rougher aspects of them. I'm so tired of this "Them or Me" mentality so prevalent in this supposedly "adult" world. These actors and actresses who were children are grown up now, so they're NOT obligated to follow JK's word like gospel because she wrote books that were turned into movies, which made these kids rich because they were a part of the cast. They aren't "ungrateful" simply for rejecting JK's anti-trans views, especially since Daniel Radcliffe, the actor who played the protagonist, acknowledges she was a part of his success, yet still disagrees with her stance on gender.

This might be tangential to some, but it's a good picture of how everything gets blown into proportion when people don't take the time to analyse what's actually going on, and this relates to MiS, because people make snap, uneducated judgements without even making an effort to understand why we advocate for male fashion freedom.

Slowly but surely the narrow-mindedness of society is being eroded and I remain optimistic. We can lead by example - we have seen instances of misogyny on this site - let's avoid this, people. Let's be better than this.

If there's any misogyny, it's the effect of realizing just how strongly society holds on to gender expectations, roles, and double standards. It hurts both sexes, but women have been actively trying to fight against this, and are often lauded for being subversive. It's much less frequent in men, is discouraged by much of the world, and when a man does try to establish himself outside these things, he's often derided and demonised. That's B.S., so what might be seen as "misogynistic" to you, may well just be one of us expressing our anger at the rampant hypocrisy and contradictions people exhibit. I've said this at least once before, but people are inconsistent with their own beliefs and values; it shows just unintelligent we really are as a collective species.