#notallmen

[jmattbassplaya]

OK, here goes.

So what you are saying, jmattbassplaya, is that I am unable to invite a guy over for coffee without him thinking I want to fool around? That somehow doesn't seem fair. Why can't it be that I would have to say "Would you like to come over and fool around" to mean "would you like to come over and fool around", and inviting someone over for coffee would mean would you like to come over for some coffee? Who made these ridiculous rules?

Not at all. Context is key.

You and I are friends and you invite me over for coffee. I have no reason to expect that to mean anything other than coffee unless there was reason to, and I'll share a story on that in a second. But looking at what I said...

I've always known someone asking someone else over for coffee or dessert to usually mean, "do you want to come over and fool around."

I should have exchanged "usually mean" with "possibly mean." My mistake there.

As to who makes the rules, I don't have an answer that I'm happy with, but I think it is a combination of culture, tribal knowledge/schooling, and personal experience. I first heard the coffee and dessert thing as a pre-teen watching, of all things, TV shows like Friends and Seinfeld. To be honest, I never put too much stock into it as anything until I personally experienced it. If I can indulge in another story...

I grew up down the street from a girl who was one year older than me. We both played soccer competitively so through that, our close proximity, and our mutual friends, we started hanging out in group settings. One night she called me up and asked me to come over to try her cupcakes. I declined because I was tired and going to bed. She then began using euphemisms revolving around baking to tell me what she really wanted.

At first I thought it was a joke and I was on speaker phone, then I thought she might have been drinking, and then I didn't know what to think until she finally spelled it out for me. That was my first personal experience with the coffee and dessert thing but it wasn't my last. So to touch on what I said at the beginning, context is key.

Men (and women) shouldn't assume things, however, culture and an individual's personal experiences can define the way in which we perceive and address the world, for better or worse. I can even admit that my use of the word "usually" is a good example of how poor word usage could play a part in creating an undesirable culture. However, based on my personal experiences "usually" is actually a fair word to use, but when discussing such things on a forum where that word could have a negative influence on how culture organically grows it probably shouldn't be utilized.

To your other point, maybe we should all use more brevity when regarding topics of sex and sexual interest, but, to Guy's point, that doesn't seem to be the world we live in from my experiences. However, that's also why this movement is so powerful. It is shaking up social norms.

 

[slobake]

Not at all. Context is key.

You and I are friends and you invite me over for coffee. I have no reason to expect that to mean anything other than coffee unless there was reason to, and I'll share a story on that in a second. But looking at what I said...



I should have exchanged "usually mean" with "possibly mean." My mistake there.

As to who makes the rules, I don't have an answer that I'm happy with, but I think it is a combination of culture, tribal knowledge/schooling, and personal experience. I first heard the coffee and dessert thing as a pre-teen watching, of all things, TV shows like Friends and Seinfeld. To be honest, I never put too much stock into it as anything until I personally experienced it. If I can indulge in another story...

I grew up down the street from a girl who was one year older than me. We both played soccer competitively so through that, our close proximity, and our mutual friends, we started hanging out in group settings. One night she called me up and asked me to come over to try her cupcakes. I declined because I was tired and going to bed. She then began using euphemisms revolving around baking to tell me what she really wanted.

At first I thought it was a joke and I was on speaker phone, then I thought she might have been drinking, and then I didn't know what to think until she finally spelled it out for me. That was my first personal experience with the coffee and dessert thing but it wasn't my last. So to touch on what I said at the beginning, context is key.

Men (and women) shouldn't assume things, however, culture and an individual's personal experiences can define the way in which we perceive and address the world, for better or worse. I can even admit that my use of the word "usually" is a good example of how poor word usage could play a part in creating an undesirable culture. However, based on my personal experiences "usually" is actually a fair word to use, but when discussing such things on a forum where that word could have a negative influence on how culture organically grows it probably shouldn't be utilized.

To your other point, maybe we should all use more brevity when regarding topics of sex and sexual interest, but, to Guy's point, that doesn't seem to be the world we live in from my experiences. However, that's also why this movement is so powerful. It is shaking up social norms.

More brevity would help. Say what you mean and mean what you say. It may be blunt but if we want to engage in sex just say so.
Even as I write this I am not sure if I am correct or justifying behavior. I am asking our sisters to be patient with me so I can hear what they have to say and learn.
Like Hrodbert I would get uncomfortable if I am alone with an attractive woman that I don't know. Been that way since puberty and it hasn't changed. Hey, I never said I don't have issues.
Also like @hrodbert696 that awkwardness diminishes as I get to know people.

 

[blue4]

Context is key.

These three words are the only ones that matter to me in any situation. I'm very glad I am in a great marriage and I'm very relieved that I've always turned down management positions when offered. Because all I see today are minefields that even the best of us have trouble navigating. It's easy to say "just treat people with respect." But that statement falls flat in a time when holding the door for a woman can be considered condescending, or saying hello in a store is often identified as another boorish come-on. We are going to become crippled as a society if we don't start learning to identify who is an actual enemy and who is just someone trying to get thru their day, or is just your average asshat. There is a difference between tasteless and predator. There is a difference between thoughtlessness and prejudice or misogyny.

Take Joss Whedon for example. He's been widely praised over the years for promoting women and creating movies and TV that portray women as capable heroes. He's also been accused, and admitted to being, a frequent cheater in his marriage. But I've yet to hear any woman say he gave them a part based on sex. I've never read or heard of any woman claiming any relationship was non-consensual. I've never even heard anyone involved use the old "I have no responsibility because he's important and I'm not" routine. The criticism in articles I've seen is that his feminist card needs to be revoked because of how he treats women. But where did he mistreat "women" in general? He screwed over his wife sure. Total POS in my opinion. But why is his disregard for a single person considered indicative of his feelings towards all women? Sleeping around is not a gender specific thing, or even specific to sexual preference. They don't even know what his marriage was like, other than her word for it. So why the feminist card revoke? I've even seen people compare him to Allen and Polanski. A man sleeping with his stepdaughter and a guy who IIRC sleeps with underage girls. Compared to a guy sleeping with willing partners.

(Please don't take this as a defense of his behavior. It's merely an example of context. Also, I haven't done any research on Whedon. So if there are facts I'm unaware of regarding his affairs, just take out the name Whedon and insert Joe Smith. Again it's not a defense.)

If you can't understand context, all you do is create enemies imo.

 

[Chicory Blue]

I brought up #notallmen in a previous discussion which fared far worse than this one seems to be- and, sincerely, thank you guys for keeping it together and discussing such a sensitive topic in a healthy fashion.

My point back then was that it’s possible for something to be well reasoned, true, and completely unhelpful all at once.

When accusations are lobbed at the male culture in general, it’s a natural and reasonable response to want to remind people that not all men do these things, and that some of you guys are *gasp* actually good people!

Except, in the thick of the moment from which it emerges, what’s usually happening is a woman is expressing a way in which she feels genuinely wronged as a human being, and consistently so, in a fashion that shows no signs of stopping. When she says “men are hurting me,” and someone responds “not all men hurt women,” or “well, sometimes women hurt men instead,” what in the world does that accomplish besides taking a bit of steam out of her argument? It preserves the egos of folks who probably knew they weren’t being accused, and insulates the people who *were* being accused from having to consider that they might be wrong.

Of course not all men are predatory, violent misogynists. You’re our brothers, our fathers, our friends, our lovers, and we love you. But we have a problem, and listening would really help, especially if you don’t think you’re part of the problem, because even if you aren’t, you can help.

Let me offer an example-
The truth of the matter is that everyone needs to be willing to sincerely consider the prospect that they are wrong, and that they can be so wrong as to do real damage to others without meaning to. This is by no means restricted to one side of a gender politics debate. Everyone is fallible. Everyone should listen to each other, and open themselves to the possibilty of improvement. Men, women, carrots, everyone.

But, in a time where half of the human race is protesting that the other half assaults, demeans, subjugates and kills them at a really disproportionate rate and needs to stop doing that, is it *really* time to say “well, why don’t you be less accusatory and stop hurting men’s feelings?”

That’s the problem with #notallmen. It misconstrues the legitimate specific grievances as a general “war on men,” takes power away from women at a time when we could really, really stand to be listened to, and transmutes that power into a rallying cry of “I personally am probably not to blame.”

Not exactly a proactive mantra, and definitely not helping the situation.

Dig?

--^@

 

[blastoff99]

@Chicory Blue , I hope you have a larger platform than this one, because that was really well said and needs to be more widely heard.

 

[Chicory Blue]

@Chicory Blue , I hope you have a larger platform than this one, because that was really well said and needs to be more widely heard.

You guys are about my only people at present, but that’s for the best. I find it’s easier to hold a dialogue at a more personal level like this than to try and be heard above a crowd.

Though, better still if the friends you reach have stages and studios, of course.. ;p

--^@

 

[murphy]

I brought up #notallmen in a previous discussion which fared far worse than this one seems to be- and, sincerely, thank you guys for keeping it together and discussing such a sensitive topic in a healthy fashion.

My point back then was that it’s possible for something to be well reasoned, true, and completely unhelpful all at once.

When accusations are lobbed at the male culture in general, it’s a natural and reasonable response to want to remind people that not all men do these things, and that some of you guys are *gasp* actually good people!

Except, in the thick of the moment from which it emerges, what’s usually happening is a woman is expressing a way in which she feels genuinely wronged as a human being, and consistently so, in a fashion that shows no signs of stopping. When she says “men are hurting me,” and someone responds “not all men hurt women,” or “well, sometimes women hurt men instead,” what in the world does that accomplish besides taking a bit of steam out of her argument? It preserves the egos of folks who probably knew they weren’t being accused, and insulates the people who *were* being accused from having to consider that they might be wrong.

Of course not all men are predatory, violent misogynists. You’re our brothers, our fathers, our friends, our lovers, and we love you. But we have a problem, and listening would really help, especially if you don’t think you’re part of the problem, because even if you aren’t, you can help.

Let me offer an example-
The truth of the matter is that everyone needs to be willing to sincerely consider the prospect that they are wrong, and that they can be so wrong as to do real damage to others without meaning to. This is by no means restricted to one side of a gender politics debate. Everyone is fallible. Everyone should listen to each other, and open themselves to the possibilty of improvement. Men, women, carrots, everyone.

But, in a time where half of the human race is protesting that the other half assaults, demeans, subjugates and kills them at a really disproportionate rate and needs to stop doing that, is it *really* time to say “well, why don’t you be less accusatory and stop hurting men’s feelings?”

That’s the problem with #notallmen. It misconstrues the legitimate specific grievances as a general “war on men,” takes power away from women at a time when we could really, really stand to be listened to, and transmutes that power into a rallying cry of “I personally am probably not to blame.”

Not exactly a proactive mantra, and definitely not helping the situation.

Dig?

--^@

I Dig

 

[FunkHead]

I thought it was No Tall Men?

 

[slobake]

I brought up #notallmen in a previous discussion which fared far worse than this one seems to be- and, sincerely, thank you guys for keeping it together and discussing such a sensitive topic in a healthy fashion.

My point back then was that it’s possible for something to be well reasoned, true, and completely unhelpful all at once.

When accusations are lobbed at the male culture in general, it’s a natural and reasonable response to want to remind people that not all men do these things, and that some of you guys are *gasp* actually good people!

Except, in the thick of the moment from which it emerges, what’s usually happening is a woman is expressing a way in which she feels genuinely wronged as a human being, and consistently so, in a fashion that shows no signs of stopping. When she says “men are hurting me,” and someone responds “not all men hurt women,” or “well, sometimes women hurt men instead,” what in the world does that accomplish besides taking a bit of steam out of her argument? It preserves the egos of folks who probably knew they weren’t being accused, and insulates the people who *were* being accused from having to consider that they might be wrong.

Of course not all men are predatory, violent misogynists. You’re our brothers, our fathers, our friends, our lovers, and we love you. But we have a problem, and listening would really help, especially if you don’t think you’re part of the problem, because even if you aren’t, you can help.

Let me offer an example-
The truth of the matter is that everyone needs to be willing to sincerely consider the prospect that they are wrong, and that they can be so wrong as to do real damage to others without meaning to. This is by no means restricted to one side of a gender politics debate. Everyone is fallible. Everyone should listen to each other, and open themselves to the possibilty of improvement. Men, women, carrots, everyone.

But, in a time where half of the human race is protesting that the other half assaults, demeans, subjugates and kills them at a really disproportionate rate and needs to stop doing that, is it *really* time to say “well, why don’t you be less accusatory and stop hurting men’s feelings?”

That’s the problem with #notallmen. It misconstrues the legitimate specific grievances as a general “war on men,” takes power away from women at a time when we could really, really stand to be listened to, and transmutes that power into a rallying cry of “I personally am probably not to blame.”

Not exactly a proactive mantra, and definitely not helping the situation.

Dig?

--^@

Thanks. I agree it would be great if more of us really listened to each other. Listening and not thinking about what I'm going to say or how I can impress you or prove you wrong but just listening.
I admit I don't always do a great job of that but when sometimes I catch myself not paying attention and tune back in. Sometimes I have to apologize, admit that I had drifted off (SQUIRREL!) and ask someone to repeat what they said.