Masculinity and men
- Thread starter Buddha1
- Start date
- Status
The usage of the word Gender to refer to 'sex' has been recent, See link, and made popular by the feminist movement. But the original intent of Gender -- and the one that we need for this discussion is different.leopold99 said:
Gender in the west actually refers to the social roles of men and women. These are roles that are expected of them by virtue of their sex. So a man would be expected to follow the male gender roles.
This view assumes Gender to be a psychological or social construct, rather than a biological one. It assumes that all Gender is orchestrated by the society. This definition of gender is also of fairly recent origin.
It seems you know very little about gender. Transexual is the extreme case of femininity. Not every predominantly feminine male is transexual. And like I said all of us have some amount of femininity in us --- that doesn't make us 'transexuals'.leopold99 said:
Even though I have also noticed this difference, but I would not put it this way --- that straight (non-heterosexual) men tend to desire non-penetrative sex with men --- they often care about mutual masturbation and stuff, and generally don't think much of copulation. On the other hand homosexual (feminine or meterosexual) men tend to care a lot about copulation) It's my observation so far, but I need more data.leopold99 said:
An interesting finding is that truly heterosexual 'straight' men (whether they are in the straight group because of their 'heterosexuality' or are really masculine is another debate) also tend to care for anal sex --- both with men and women, and this is yet another striking similarity between the true 'heterosexuals' and 'homosexuals'.
Actually, in my opinion true heterosexuals and true homosexuals should be classified in one gender group, while the straight group should be a seperate gender group --- based on masculine gender, not on sexual preference.
I know even the idea that their is femininity in you seems too scary. But that is because the society has denigrated it too much. And yet it is a fact that all of us have it, some less some more.leopold99 said:
At least at the theoretical level, I have started talking about finding out and accepting the femininity in oneself --- however small or big, as an important source of inner-strength.
I've done my initial talking. I have read about others. I know it would be great to talk to them more, but in my country transexuals live in separate groups and don't share their secrets with others.leopold99 said:
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
Retract this immediately or I shall report this post. You are deliberately maligning my position.Buddha1 said:
1. I am stating that I am personally unaware of such pressures on myself or on others and have asked you repeatedly to provide evidence for them that constitutes more than just saying they exist. I am open to the possibility that such pressures exist: I have repeatedly asked for evidence. It has not been forthcoming.
2. You have not disproved it earlier.
You claim to want a debate, yet you have utterly avoided the points raised in my last post to you. You continually ignore points that come to close to the mark, then later claim you have refuted them. This is dishonest and must stop.
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
For someone who says they want to discuss the issues, you seem very adept at avoiding the important questions:
This was posted three or four pages ago. I am still awaiting a response.
You see. You are at it again. Life and death for which men? In what way is this issue (I'm not even sure which issue you mean, so you have a chance to work a fast one here) life and death for me? I fail utterly and completely to see. Show it to me. Open my eyes to the truth. (Yes, its sarcasm. I'm using it to help convey how absolutely you fail to convey something of significance for me - and nothing remotely approaching life and death. Boredom and bemusement perhaps.)
This was posted three or four pages ago. I am still awaiting a response.
You see. You are at it again. Life and death for which men? In what way is this issue (I'm not even sure which issue you mean, so you have a chance to work a fast one here) life and death for me? I fail utterly and completely to see. Show it to me. Open my eyes to the truth. (Yes, its sarcasm. I'm using it to help convey how absolutely you fail to convey something of significance for me - and nothing remotely approaching life and death. Boredom and bemusement perhaps.)
Let me just remind you of our recent discussion on the other thread (Gender orientation is biological):
Ophiolite: Are you living in a time warp? The attitudes and pressures you are describing are straight out of the fifties or earlier. What country do you live in? Somewhere in the east, you say. Remarkable.
Buddha1 asks for clarification
Ophiolite: These are two examples from your previous post, but they made me realise many of your posts were filled with the same description of outmoded attitudes, that are going the way of the Dodo and the dinosaur.
Ophiolite: You are describing pressures and views that are in a declining minority in the west. So where are these views still in vogue? That is what is puzzling me.
Buddha1 gives a long explanation of his views
Buddha1 (providing external evidence):
PRESSURES OF SOCIAL MASCULINITY:
Here are external links for ya:
- Crime aqainst nature: Psychologist's play focuses on growing up male in America
- Social pressures on men are ingrained, says study
Boys and men
- UNFPA status of world population 2005
- An interesting personal account of a woman living in the west
Ophiolite: .....You are either living in a time warp, or are immersed in a culture that has little connectivity with the West of today. Are they showing the Maltese Falcon at the Odeon this weekend?
There is not even an acknowledgment of the evidences/ links I have provided. But that is typical of Ophiolite and some others. When he loses an argument, he just slips off. Doesn't have the guts to admit he could have been mistaken.
Ophiolite: Are you living in a time warp? The attitudes and pressures you are describing are straight out of the fifties or earlier. What country do you live in? Somewhere in the east, you say. Remarkable.
Buddha1 asks for clarification
Ophiolite: These are two examples from your previous post, but they made me realise many of your posts were filled with the same description of outmoded attitudes, that are going the way of the Dodo and the dinosaur.
Ophiolite: You are describing pressures and views that are in a declining minority in the west. So where are these views still in vogue? That is what is puzzling me.
Buddha1 gives a long explanation of his views
Buddha1 (providing external evidence):
PRESSURES OF SOCIAL MASCULINITY:
Here are external links for ya:
- Crime aqainst nature: Psychologist's play focuses on growing up male in America
- Social pressures on men are ingrained, says study
Boys and men
- UNFPA status of world population 2005
- An interesting personal account of a woman living in the west
Ophiolite: .....You are either living in a time warp, or are immersed in a culture that has little connectivity with the West of today. Are they showing the Maltese Falcon at the Odeon this weekend?
There is not even an acknowledgment of the evidences/ links I have provided. But that is typical of Ophiolite and some others. When he loses an argument, he just slips off. Doesn't have the guts to admit he could have been mistaken.
Buddha1 said:
And what does Ophiolite do next?
On another thread discussing "Masculinity and men" he rakes up the same old debate again (as if I never provided any evidences or instances) about pressures for men being a whiff of my imagination.
Sample this:
Ophiolite: You see. You are at it again. Life and death for which men? In what way is this issue (I'm not even sure which issue you mean, so you have a chance to work a fast one here) life and death for me? I fail utterly and completely to see. Show it to me. Open my eyes to the truth. (Yes, its sarcasm. I'm using it to help convey how absolutely you fail to convey something of significance for me - and nothing remotely approaching life and death. Boredom and bemusement perhaps.)
At the same time he also accuses me of this on the thread:
Ophiolite:
1. You have not played the debating game fairly. I, and others, have refuted your so called evidence, and you have denied this.
2. You have disregarded the data we have submitted in support of conventional views.
Last edited:
None at all!Ophiolite said:You don't suppose there is a teeny weeny possibility that this continual denial is related to the fact that most men don't have a sexual interest in other men? No!That is really too far fetched to be given any credence whatsoever.
I would more readily believe that pigs might fly.
After having seen what goes on behind the masks of men, after having worked with them on these issues for 10 years, you want me to disbelieve what I saw, and believe what the 'heterosexual' society tells us.
I have also seen (and shown) how men lie about their sexual need for men. They do it for different motives. Primary motives are to remove their vulnerability and/ or as a power statement. I know that 99% (in my society --- and a rough estimate) of men do that. In your society the figure may be 90 - 95%.
When I discussed this issue on the thread "95% of men have a sexual need for men", there was a heated argument for 5 or 6 pages --- lasting about a week (I don't remember if you were there). And then I provide my first evidence. And then like magic, everyone disappears for a couple of days. There is complete silence which is acknowledged on the thread. Another poster gives some more evidences of this.
This is when Ophiolite and others start their politics to have the thread merged with others into an unreadable and massive mess --- so that they don't have to encounter statements like "95% of men have a sexual need for men" which are a sore in their eyes.
It would be interesting to study why they can't deal with it, when as they say this is not the truth. Why does it rattle them then? Why is what I'm saying perceived as such a threat to 'heterosexual' identity, if you sincerely believe its naural?
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
The post above, timed at 8:45 am GMT is the first instance in which I have seen the links Bhudda1 claims to have previously posted. They constitute the second instance only, that I am aware of, of items offered as evidence by Bhudda1. I shall study them now.
In the meantime, please tell Bhudda1 how the issue, whatever the hell it was, is a 'life and death issue'. You have not addressed that.
In the meantime, please tell Bhudda1 how the issue, whatever the hell it was, is a 'life and death issue'. You have not addressed that.
I've already responded to a similar post by Avatar. It's not for me to tell you how you're affected by these pressures. If you're honest you'll know yourself. Such personal things cannot be proven this way or the other.Ophiolite said:
Afterall, you have continuously shown yourself to be unobjective, dishonest and biased. If you can deny that pressures exist for other men, when there are 'external evidences' all over the net, how easy will it be for you to deny anything that I may speculate about you.
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
A quick scan of the links you have provided shows that they discuss (not prove) that there are pressures on men today. I don't believe I have denied that. What I am denying are some of the specific pressures (e.g. smoking is seen as a very masculine attribute) and the causes of it (heterosexuality is unnatural). I can see nothing in the material you have presented that would cause me to change my view. Please tell me where in these links specific support is given to one of your identified pressures, or to the cause of that pressure.
Correction.....it is one of the few instances (not 2nd) when I have provided external evidences for my assertions.Ophiolite said:
But that does not invalidate the hundreds of other evidences I've talked about (to take a recent example, the T.V. show instance) for which although I have not given external links (for some none exist), but they are easily verifiable --- even on the net.
You can't dismiss an evidence just because there is not a link attached to it. You can only dismiss an evidence by showing how it is wrong.
The truly straight men would rather die, than lose his social manhood. Part of this is social, part natural. If he lives he will lead a very stressful life. It's the same all over the world.Ophiolite said:
Men who get the 'straight' status, just for their heterosexualtiy, without deserving or really knowing what being 'straight' actually mean, will not understand this phenomenon.
There ought to be external evidences of what I'm saying, let me search on the net.
Meanwhile here is one evidence from a discovery channnel programme several months ago about Greek masculinity. According to the commentary:
"Men used to enter into fierce physical combats in order to 'prove their manhood'. These combats used to be deadly. They often resulted in one (or sometimes both) the competitors dying or being crippled for life. They used to be no-holds barred fights.
And the rewards. The winner used to be regarded as the Alpha male. And he would get the sexual attention/ company of the best of (male) youth."
That you consider all of my assertions --- one and the same thing (heterosexuality is not natural) is not my fault. For me they are quite different though related issues. They are NOT one issue. That is why I had created separate threads to discuss each one of them.Ophiolite said:
I don't intend to provide you one link that 'proves' or hints at everything I have said at one place.
In the above instance I did not intend to prove that 'heterosexuality is unnatural' (that has already been proven!). I intended to show you that men do go through intense pressures --- even in the west. Intense enough that even a heterosexual society has to talk about them.
No amount of evidences or truth will make a biased person with vested interests change his views. On the other hand to an honest and objective reader even a logical discussion and a heart to heart talk is sometimes enough.Ophiolite said:
Admittedly, I too have not gone through them. Here is one such support by a straight woman (Link here :Ophiolite said:
"People talk about female sexuality being more fluid than male. I rather see this more as a social construction than something from female brains, or female hormones, or whatnot. I do think that male sexuality is just as fluid, but because of social pressures of masculinity, it is not expressed."
I have seen men struggle with themselves and go to such pains to give secretive, silent, subdued, camouflaged and indirect expressions to their sexual need for men --- expressions that are so superficial (sometimes as superficial as touching someone's crotch accidentally), and men go through such pain to accomplish that. Same men who use their 'heterosexuality' as a shield. Including men who have (in their own words) reacted violently when approached by men they did not like or fem gays, by claiming a lack of interest in men.Buddha1 said:
For men to desire it so much (evidenced by the pains they take) and still not being able to be open about it or to give any meaningful expression to their sexual need shows that they are operating under an extremely heavy pressure.
Here is a personal account of a heterosexual poster from the west that supports both my points:Ophiolite said:
- That the pressures of masculinity in some cases are matters of life and death.
- that there is an intense pressure to suppress one's sexual need for men that works specifically on straight men.
Here are excerpts from a post by VossistArt (Link here ):
"Im strictly heterosexual, thats how I feel but im pretty sure why i am. i was brought into the world and exposed to loving heterosexual parents only. at the youngest of ages,when running around with other boys, and the subject, or any event or action suggestive of homosexual behaviour came up, it was always reacted to with repulsion, even anger and sometimes physical hostility. it was decided in the groups of boys i ran around with that homosexuality or bi-sexuality and the possiblility of being tagged with either orientation, was like a fate worse than death."
- Status