Much has changed in recent decades. I think the core issue is that it comes down to the individual. You are going to find the "submissive" female who wants a man to take care of her, and you're going to find the man "who's still attached to his mother." As you've seen, you're also going to get the charged language regarding these issues.
I know females who want (and maybe need) men to look after them; I know females who know---for a fact---they don't (my grandmother is one of them and has been for decades, while my other grandmother was one of them until the day she died).
I also know males who would probably be way, way worse off without their wives. This mainly because I knew them before they met their wives. I also know males who are so independent of their wives/girlfriends that these women are almost completely absent from my view.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KirStang
You're confusing male/female with 'masculine' and 'feminine.' The latter two words are associated with what is deemed socially suitable for members of gender. In other words, certain things are associated with 'masculine' and certain things are associated with 'feminine,' depending on what is culturally assigned to it.
|
I agree with this only to an extent. Masculine and feminine are problematic words today, mainly because of the advent of feminism and all the developments regarding gender and cultural studies. Today, they're best left as generalisms, which are problems in and of themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tasineah
well, he shouldnt...again, its mysogynistic...the way to degrade a man is to call him a woman.
|
Actually, it's much more a case of misandry than it is misogyny. But misandry still remains---largely---a "non-problem" to most people.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tasineah
He isnt being called feminine because its a good thing..he is being callled feminine because its a bad thing...
historically...want to tear down a man? Call him a woman...
|
Like this.