Traditional gender roles

[Farnhamia]

I just got through with the big feminism thread. Good points made on both sides too. Personally I'm a little old fashioned, not that I think women as ya know human beings are entitled to human rights, that we all deserve. But when it comes to gender roles (I'm a dude if you haven't guessed already) I abide by them, and after some disparaging comments, I just am wondering how anybody else feels about traditional gender roles? Personally I think they're to a point needed for a more polite society especially for men as traditional etiquette (at least in the west) teaches stoicism and treating women with respect. And for any feminist who feels like calling me a misogynist, it's this very attitude that got me my gf soooo.....

Mod Edit: Typo in the title corrected

[Lydenburg]

Personally I'm a little old fashioned, not that I think women as ya know human beings are entitled to human rights, that we all deserve. But when it comes to gender roles (I'm a dude if you haven't guessed already) I abide by them

So you don't appreciate women exhibiting lib tendencies?

[Ashkera]

For my part, I realized a number of years ago that I'm more masculine than feminine, but not gender-pure, and date almost exclusively bisexual women. (Not intentionally. I seem to either attract them more or read their attraction better.)

I'm not too pumped about the male role, especially when enforcement of it is one-sided.

[Diopolis]

I'm a complementarian, so I view gender roles as the fulfillment of men and women.

[Liriena]

If someone wants to abide by any gender roles, then that is their right. Personally, I don't care for gender roles one bit, specially when the prevailing machismo in the society I live in turns many of the men around me into sexually insecure, overcompensating "macho men", and makes it very difficult for me to be able to express my more delicate side.

[The Island of Quickscopers]

I don't care about them. I don't care of it's a Mr.Mom situation or not.

[Torisakia]

I've never really cared for gender roles. You should just abide by gender roles how you see fit.

[Imperium Sidhicum]

Men are hard-wired to be the protectors and caretakers of their families. Their success at protecting and caring for their mate and offspring is fundamental to their self-esteem and ego. By failing to indulge their desire to care and protect in the name of false equality, women only hurt themselves by making men around them weak, effete, frustrated and confused, traits which they will also pass on to their sons because they will lack a better example to learn from. Consequently, women suffer as well, having to deal with frustrating and unfulfilling relationships, divorces and whatnot simply because their men are no longer manly. They have been taught that the desire to protect and care for the womenfolk, the essence of manliness, is a cardinal sin, that it is "sexist", immoral and wrong.

So while there's little doubt that women are capable of doing most tasks no worse than men, that doesn't mean they necessarily should. It's all good and commendable that a woman knows how to take care of herself in the absence of a male companion, but women would do wise to let their mates feel dominant and manly. A manly man is a happy man, and a happy man will also strive to make his woman happier.

After all, who really leads the family - the head of the family, or the neck that turns the head?

[Arcturus Novus]

I dislike the concept of gender in general. I really dislike the roles associated with the Western gender binary.

[Ifreann]

Men are hard-wired to be the protectors and caretakers of their families.

Not really, though.

[Torisakia]

Men are hard-wired to be the protectors and caretakers of their families. Their success at protecting and caring for their mate and offspring is fundamental to their self-esteem and ego. By failing to indulge their desire to care and protect in the name of false equality, women only hurt themselves by making men around them weak, effete, frustrated and confused, traits which they will also pass on to their sons because they will lack a better example to learn from. Consequently, women suffer as well, having to deal with frustrating and unfulfilling relationships, divorces and whatnot simply because their men are no longer manly. They have been taught that the desire to protect and care for the womenfolk, the essence of manliness, is a cardinal sin, that it is "sexist", immoral and wrong.

So while there's little doubt that women are capable of doing most tasks no worse than men, that doesn't mean they necessarily should. It's all good and commendable that a woman knows how to take care of herself in the absence of a male companion, but women would do wise to let their mates feel dominant and manly. A manly man is a happy man, and a happy man will also strive to make his woman happier.

After all, who really leads the family - the head of the family, or the neck that turns the head?

If all this is true, then I really feel bad for my future family if I have one. I'm not manly at all.

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

It really only becomes a strike against your character if you think it's acceptable or good to punish others for not falling in to your proscribed gender roles.

Thought I also think that personally ascribing to them makes you more likely to neglect your own talents and needs.

[Fanosolia]

Personal opinion? Whether they become abolished or not, we shouldn't have this expectation for people to fulfill for reason of tradition. If anything it's should be more about teaching our people to be involved, respectful, and better people and find out who they are without regard for what roles they fill. I mean outside of opinion I still have some roles that are "guy" related like the outside stoic, and likes action related things, but also caring, and has a weakness to cute, but that's because that's what I'm comfortable with.

[Ashkera]

Men are hard-wired to be the protectors and caretakers of their families.

Not really, though.

Well, kinda-sorta maybe, but it wouldn't apply to all of them and it's too difficult to tease out the magnitude without really unethical experiments.

[Kvatchdom]

You can't stop the nature of humans, but there's no harm for slightly straying from it.

[Murray land]

Personally I'm a little old fashioned, not that I think women as ya know human beings are entitled to human rights, that we all deserve. But when it comes to gender roles (I'm a dude if you haven't guessed already) I abide by them

So you don't appreciate women exhibiting lib tendencies?

No I can appreciate another's point of view, to a point i suppose. I certainly am not attracted to women who exhibit these tendencies though.

[The New Sea Territory]

...are disgusting. Their rejection should be encouraged.

[Dakini]

Fuck traditional gender roles.

[Nazi Flower Power]

It's not that you can't follow traditional gender roles. It's just that you shouldn't pressure other people to follow them. They are not right for everyone.

My dad's a nice guy, and he's never had any problem looking after me or my brother when we needed a parent to look after us, but I can't imagine him holding down a normal full-time day job for any length of time -- at least not a good one. Meanwhile, my mom has a six-figure salary and has always been more career-oriented. It just always made more sense for my dad to take care of a lot of stuff around the house so that my mom would have time for her career.

[Replevion]

Men are hard-wired to be the protectors and caretakers of their families. Their success at protecting and caring for their mate and offspring is fundamental to their self-esteem and ego. By failing to indulge their desire to care and protect in the name of false equality, women only hurt themselves by making men around them weak, effete, frustrated and confused, traits which they will also pass on to their sons because they will lack a better example to learn from. Consequently, women suffer as well, having to deal with frustrating and unfulfilling relationships, divorces and whatnot simply because their men are no longer manly. They have been taught that the desire to protect and care for the womenfolk, the essence of manliness, is a cardinal sin, that it is "sexist", immoral and wrong.

So while there's little doubt that women are capable of doing most tasks no worse than men, that doesn't mean they necessarily should. It's all good and commendable that a woman knows how to take care of herself in the absence of a male companion, but women would do wise to let their mates feel dominant and manly. A manly man is a happy man, and a happy man will also strive to make his woman happier.

After all, who really leads the family - the head of the family, or the neck that turns the head?

Such generalizations... there are not absolute and immutable categories into which the sexes should segregate themselves or risk social collapse. Some men are meek. Some women like that, either because they don't like to be dominated or they like dominating their guys. Some women are very driven and dominant, and some men like that, either because they don't like doormats, or again, want to be dominated. And the traditional dominant male and submissive female paradigm still exists too, and it still works for some people, but not all people. And those people for whom it holds no attraction are not inferior, not the rot of the social fabric, they're just different people. Get thee over it.

It's not that you can't follow traditional gender roles. It's just that you shouldn't pressure other people to follow them. They are not right for everyone.

My dad's a nice guy, and he's never had any problem looking after me or my brother when we needed a parent to look after us, but I can't imagine him holding down a normal full-time day job for any length of time -- at least not a good one. Meanwhile, my mom has a six-figure salary and has always been more career-oriented. It just always made more sense for my dad to take care of a lot of stuff around the house so that my mom would have time for her career.

And that's why it's important for people to mesh with each other. When two very ambitious people get together they have a hard time raising a family because neither one wants to be domestic. We need ambitious, outward-facing people of both genders to match the domestic, inward-facing people of both genders. Shaming one or the other into fighting their nature to be something for someone is quite possibly depriving not only them but somebody who needs them.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

Men are hard-wired to be the protectors and caretakers of their families. Their success at protecting and caring for their mate and offspring is fundamental to their self-esteem and ego. By failing to indulge their desire to care and protect in the name of false equality, women only hurt themselves by making men around them weak, effete, frustrated and confused, traits which they will also pass on to their sons because they will lack a better example to learn from. Consequently, women suffer as well, having to deal with frustrating and unfulfilling relationships, divorces and whatnot simply because their men are no longer manly. They have been taught that the desire to protect and care for the womenfolk, the essence of manliness, is a cardinal sin, that it is "sexist", immoral and wrong.

So while there's little doubt that women are capable of doing most tasks no worse than men, that doesn't mean they necessarily should. It's all good and commendable that a woman knows how to take care of herself in the absence of a male companion, but women would do wise to let their mates feel dominant and manly. A manly man is a happy man, and a happy man will also strive to make his woman happier.

After all, who really leads the family - the head of the family, or the neck that turns the head?

Even if that were true...appeal to nature.

[Neo-Chicago]

I just got through with the big feminism thread. Good points made on both sides too. Personally I'm a little old fashioned, not that I think women as ya know human beings are entitled to human rights, that we all deserve. But when it comes to gender roles (I'm a dude if you haven't guessed already) I abide by them, and after some disparaging comments, I just am wondering how anybody else feels about traditional gender roles? Personally I think they're to a point needed for a more polite society especially for men as traditional etiquette (at least in the west) teaches stoicism and treating women with respect. And for any feminist who feels like calling me a misogynist, it's this very attitude that got me my gf soooo.....

I most definitely agree with you, I'm for traditional gender roles. I'm not particularly sure what else to say, but I guess any person who disagrees with me can say "Why? What the hell, man?"

[Murray land]

Men are hard-wired to be the protectors and caretakers of their families. Their success at protecting and caring for their mate and offspring is fundamental to their self-esteem and ego. By failing to indulge their desire to care and protect in the name of false equality, women only hurt themselves by making men around them weak, effete, frustrated and confused, traits which they will also pass on to their sons because they will lack a better example to learn from. Consequently, women suffer as well, having to deal with frustrating and unfulfilling relationships, divorces and whatnot simply because their men are no longer manly. They have been taught that the desire to protect and care for the womenfolk, the essence of manliness, is a cardinal sin, that it is "sexist", immoral and wrong.

So while there's little doubt that women are capable of doing most tasks no worse than men, that doesn't mean they necessarily should. It's all good and commendable that a woman knows how to take care of herself in the absence of a male companion, but women would do wise to let their mates feel dominant and manly. A manly man is a happy man, and a happy man will also strive to make his woman happier.

After all, who really leads the family - the head of the family, or the neck that turns the head?

Chill out Herbert Spencer, not everything is survival of the fittest.

[Grave_n_idle]

I just got through with the big feminism thread. Good points made on both sides too. Personally I'm a little old fashioned, not that I think women as ya know human beings are entitled to human rights, that we all deserve. But when it comes to gender roles (I'm a dude if you haven't guessed already) I abide by them, and after some disparaging comments, I just am wondering how anybody else feels about traditional gender roles? Personally I think they're to a point needed for a more polite society especially for men as traditional etiquette (at least in the west) teaches stoicism and treating women with respect. And for any feminist who feels like calling me a misogynist, it's this very attitude that got me my gf soooo.....

I don't really know what you mean by 'traditional gender roles', since you were so vague about it.

Do you mean the man works while the woman watches the house? That kind of thing? If so - that's a fairly recent gender role (basically Victorian), and not one that lasted particularly long - it's been on it's way out since the Depression.

Or do you mean you think a guy should sit in front of the tv while his wife does everything and occasionally cracks him a beer?

In fact - the whole thing is kind of vague, and a bit self-indulgently bloggy.

Is there anything for us to actually debate here?

[Saiwania]

I try my best to be a man's man, so if anyone has a problem with that, oh well. I'm never becoming one of those house husbands or metro-sexuals.