• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

What Do Men Think It Means To Be A Man?

ruby said:
38% of blue collar workers and 24% of white collar workers admitted to engaging in at least one of the behaviours deemed to be objectionable or potentially objectionable.
...
It seems to me that whatever way we slice it, it's very likely a small minority of men who are harassers*.

I realize you were qualifying that to international statistics, but if we take just the numbers you presented, it would mean a total of 62% of men, presumably, in the work place are the problem, which is by no means a “small minority.”

If you then go back to laughing dog’s NPR piece, you see:

The results, released in a report Wednesday, show that 77 percent of women had experienced verbal sexual harassment, and 51 percent had been sexually touched without their permission. About 41 percent said they had been sexually harassed online, and 27 percent said they had survived sexual assault.

The report also looked into locations where people experienced harassment. The majority of women — 66 percent — said they'd been sexually harassed in public spaces. "The public forums are where you see the more chronic experiences of sexual harassment," says Raj. These include verbal harassment and physical harassment, like touching and groping.

However, 38 percent of women said they experienced sexual harassment at the workplace. Thirty-five percent said they had experienced it at their residence. These experiences are more likely to be assaults and the "most severe forms" of harassment, says Raj.

"The findings show that this is a pervasive problem and permeates all sectors of our lives," says Holly Kearl, the main author of the report. "Most people who said they had experienced sexual harassment experienced it in multiple locations."

38% were harassed in the workplace, with 62% of men confessing to having harassed someone in the workplace. Which means that the numbers are likely much much higher to account for all of the harassment going on outside the workplace as well, so we’re probably looking at something closer to 75%-80%.

Here, by the way, is the full breakdown from the study for those itt too reading challenged to bother:

More than 3 in 4 women (77%) and 1 in 3 men (34%) experienced verbal sexual harassment;
  • 1 in 2 women (51%) and 1 in 6 men (17%) were sexually touched in an unwelcome way;
  • Around 4 in 10 women (41%) and 1 in 4 men (22%) experienced cyber sexual harassment;
  • More than 1 in 3 women (34%) and 1 in 10 men (12%) were physically followed;
  • Close to 1 in 3 women (30%) and 1 in 10 men (12%) faced unwanted genital flashing;
  • More than 1 in 4 women (27%) and 1 in 14 men (7%) survived sexual assault.

Also of note:

Among persons who experienced sexual harassment and assault, 88% of women and 86% of men reported experiencing it in more than one location and most indicated at least 4-5 locations.

If it’s just a “minority” of harassers, then they sure do get around a lot.
 
With the caveat that men who are not guilty or who are not part of the problem should not be lumped in with those who are.

A man is harming women through intimidation, suggestive behavior, insults, exclusion (in a workplace), unequal treatment such as pay, or ongoing assault such as grabbing her. He is part of the problem.
Who else on this list is also “part of the problem?”
  • A man in the office (or park or restaurant or apartment building) who joins in
  • A man who laughs when he sees it
  • A man who sees it and doesn’t think it’s a problem
  • A man who sees it and does nothing
  • A man who sees it and doesn’t even see it.

You forgot include;
A woman in the office (or park or restaurant or apartment building) who joins in
A woman who laughs when he sees it
A woman who sees it and doesn’t think it’s a problem
A woman who sees it and does nothing
A woman who sees it and doesn’t even see it.
A woman who wishes she was getting some of that attention - 'appropriate' sexual overture first moves.
Today on Moore-Coulter we discuss how some people just don't understand magnitudes.

Man, the heat today on Earth is just as bad as on the Sun.
 
Indeed. Yet some seek to define men feminists and "male culture" feminism by the negative that some men feminists do. We shouldn't do that to any gender, race, etc. We shouldn't have to even write that.

FIFY

Damn. I need another new irony meter. :)

Feminism is an ideology. Male is a gender. I shoud not have to explain that either.
 
I realize you were qualifying that to international statistics, but if we take just the numbers you presented, it would mean a total of 62% of men, presumably, in the work place are the problem, which is by no means a “small minority.”

I don't know what you mean by 'international statistics', but I would say that I am using the data from the article.

If you then go back to laughing dog’s NPR piece, you see:



38% were harassed in the workplace, with 62% of men confessing to having harassed someone in the workplace. Which means that the numbers are likely much much higher to account for all of the harassment going on outside the workplace as well, so we’re probably looking at something closer to 75%-80%.

Here, by the way, is the full breakdown from the study for those itt too reading challenged to bother:

More than 3 in 4 women (77%) and 1 in 3 men (34%) experienced verbal sexual harassment;
  • 1 in 2 women (51%) and 1 in 6 men (17%) were sexually touched in an unwelcome way;
  • Around 4 in 10 women (41%) and 1 in 4 men (22%) experienced cyber sexual harassment;
  • More than 1 in 3 women (34%) and 1 in 10 men (12%) were physically followed;
  • Close to 1 in 3 women (30%) and 1 in 10 men (12%) faced unwanted genital flashing;
  • More than 1 in 4 women (27%) and 1 in 14 men (7%) survived sexual assault.

Also of note:

Among persons who experienced sexual harassment and assault, 88% of women and 86% of men reported experiencing it in more than one location and most indicated at least 4-5 locations.

If it’s just a “minority” of harassers, then they sure do get around a lot.

Quite honestly, I must have missed where it said that 62% of men confessed to having harassed someone in the workplace?
 
You forgot include;
A woman in the office (or park or restaurant or apartment building) who joins in
A woman who laughs when he sees it
A woman who sees it and doesn’t think it’s a problem
A woman who sees it and does nothing
A woman who sees it and doesn’t even see it.
A woman who wishes she was getting some of that attention - 'appropriate' sexual overture first moves.
Today on Moore-Coulter we discuss how some people just don't understand magnitudes.

Man, the heat today on Earth is just as bad as on the Sun.

Today on Sexist in the City we discuss how some people seek to define "male culture" as the bad that some men do, and how others seek to define Male as responsible behaviour. We also discuss how some state how men who fail to stand up for others are a problem, without mentioning women who fail to stand up for others, and some who react defensively when women who fail to stand up for others do get added to this sentiment.

We explore why some people claim false equivalency when others include women in those who should stand up for people, but do not claim false equivalency when rape and a wide spectrum of words and gestures are grouped together in "studies" in order to inflate statistics, or when good men are grouped with bad. And for comic relief, we have brought along the laughing guard dog who tries and fails to bite anyone who would dare question the group think of his masters.

News at 11.
 
Last edited:
Quite honestly, I must have missed where it said that 62% of men confessed to having harassed someone in the workplace?

Odd, since I quoted it directly:

38% of blue collar workers and 24% of white collar workers admitted to engaging in at least one of the behaviours deemed to be objectionable or potentially objectionable.

That’s a total of 62% of workers, presumably men, confessing to having engaged in “objectionable” behavior.
 
You forgot include;
A woman in the office (or park or restaurant or apartment building) who joins in
A woman who laughs when he sees it
A woman who sees it and doesn’t think it’s a problem
A woman who sees it and does nothing
A woman who sees it and doesn’t even see it.
A woman who wishes she was getting some of that attention - 'appropriate' sexual overture first moves.
Today on Moore-Coulter we discuss how some people just don't understand magnitudes.

Man, the heat today on Earth is just as bad as on the Sun.

Today on Sexist in the City we discuss how some people seek to define "male culture" as the bad that some men do, and how others seek to define Male as responsible behaviour. We also discuss how some state how men who fail to stand up for others are a problem, without mentioning women who fail to stand up for others, and some who react defensively when women who fail to stand up for others do get added to this sentiment.

We explore why some people claim false equivalency when others include women in those who should stand up for people, but do not claim false equivalency when rape and a wide spectrum of words and gestures are grouped together in "studies" in order to inflate statistics, or when good men are grouped with bad. And for comic relief, we have brought along the laughing guard dog who tries and fails to bite anyone who would dare question the group think of his masters.

News at 11.
The group think?

Person A: Sexual Harassment exists and is more prevalent than is understood.
Person B: I think it is in part a male dominated culture that allows this behavior to continue well in the 21st Century despite efforts to wipe it out dating back to the 80s.
Person C:

306529.jpg

Labels!!!

 
You forgot include;
A woman in the office (or park or restaurant or apartment building) who joins in
A woman who laughs when he sees it
A woman who sees it and doesn’t think it’s a problem
A woman who sees it and does nothing
A woman who sees it and doesn’t even see it.
A woman who wishes she was getting some of that attention - 'appropriate' sexual overture first moves.
Today on Moore-Coulter we discuss how some people just don't understand magnitudes.

Man, the heat today on Earth is just as bad as on the Sun.

Today on Sexist in the City we discuss how some people seek to define "male culture" as the bad that some men do, and how others seek to define Male as responsible behaviour. We also discuss how some state how men who fail to stand up for others are a problem, without mentioning women who fail to stand up for others, and some who react defensively when women who fail to stand up for others do get added to this sentiment.

We explore why some people claim false equivalency when others include women in those who should stand up for people, but do not claim false equivalency when rape and a wide spectrum of words and gestures are grouped together in "studies" in order to inflate statistics, or when good men are grouped with bad. And for comic relief, we have brought along the laughing guard dog who tries and fails to bite anyone who would dare question the group think of his masters.

News at 11.

About mysoginistic comments:


Women are not in male locker rooms or all male gatherings where quite a bit of this kind of misogynistic comments occurs most. I as a female rarely hear these comments - and I have spoken out when I hear them as well as other women I know. Comment like these rarely occur in my presence, and I work in a male-dominated field. In fact I had a subcontractor tell me that a male employee was extremely bad with this behavior in front of them (all men) but never utter these misogynistic comments in my presence. So more opportunities to speak out against this behavior in my experience occur in all male situations rather in mixed company.

Sure women don't say anything - they should, however, in my experience more opportunities to speak up are with men.
 
Men who don't conflate their ego with the privilege society hands them also don't have a hard time understanding any of this.
 
Quite honestly, I must have missed where it said that 62% of men confessed to having harassed someone in the workplace?

Odd, since I quoted it directly:

38% of blue collar workers and 24% of white collar workers admitted to engaging in at least one of the behaviours deemed to be objectionable or potentially objectionable.

That’s a total of 62% of workers, presumably men, confessing to having engaged in “objectionable” behavior.

I can't tell if you are joking. That's not how percentages combine (if 50% of men are fat and 50% of women are fat, are 100% of humans fat?). That presumption they are all men is contradicted in the studies you quote. You dropped potentially objectionable and went only with objectionable. You did all that to get to 62%?
 
To be fair - I would also like to add that some all women gatherings I have attended are complete male bashing sessions and complain fests. I do speak up at these. If it continues, I get up and leave. I am asked quite often to attend various "women groups" and unless there is a defined agenda I don't go. But these are complain fests about what males have or haven't done, not sexist statements.
 
Quite honestly, I must have missed where it said that 62% of men confessed to having harassed someone in the workplace?

Odd, since I quoted it directly:

38% of blue collar workers and 24% of white collar workers admitted to engaging in at least one of the behaviours deemed to be objectionable or potentially objectionable.

That’s a total of 62% of workers, presumably men, confessing to having engaged in “objectionable” behaviour.

I don't think you can add the two figures like that? Even if they were all from the same workplace (which I don't think they were) I don't think you can add them. It depends what proportion of blue and white collar workers were asked, but if for example it was an equal number of each then the total would be 31% (midway between 38 and 24) admitting to one of the actions listed.

And yes, it is useful to distinguish between harassment and behaviour which may (or may not) be objectionable (ie is potentially objectionable). As the article says, "Misreporting might make the numbers too low. Counting harmless actions might make them too high".
 
Sure women don't say anything - they should, however, in my experience more opportunities to speak up are with men.

Everyone should speak up or do something when others are attacked, and some have more opportunities to do so than others. Point well taken. Well said.
 
Today on Sexist in the City we discuss how some people seek to define "male culture" as the bad that some men do, and how others seek to define Male as responsible behaviour. We also discuss how some state how men who fail to stand up for others are a problem, without mentioning women who fail to stand up for others, and some who react defensively when women who fail to stand up for others do get added to this sentiment.

We explore why some people claim false equivalency when others include women in those who should stand up for people, but do not claim false equivalency when rape and a wide spectrum of words and gestures are grouped together in "studies" in order to inflate statistics, or when good men are grouped with bad. And for comic relief, we have brought along the laughing guard dog who tries and fails to bite anyone who would dare question the group think of his masters.

News at 11.

About mysoginistic comments:


Women are not in male locker rooms or all male gatherings where quite a bit of this kind of misogynistic comments occurs most. I as a female rarely hear these comments - and I have spoken out when I hear them as well as other women I know. Comment like these rarely occur in my presence, and I work in a male-dominated field. In fact I had a subcontractor tell me that a male employee was extremely bad with this behavior in front of them (all men) but never utter these misogynistic comments in my presence. So more opportunities to speak out against this behavior in my experience occur in all male situations rather in mixed company.

Sure women don't say anything - they should, however, in my experience more opportunities to speak up are with men.
Locker room? Where have I heard that?

Trump Tweet during P-Gate said:
I’m not proud of my locker room talk. But this world has serious problems. We need serious leaders.
 
Sure women don't say anything - they should, however, in my experience more opportunities to speak up are with men.

Sounds fair.

Imo, it isn't generally easy for either sex to speak up, for a variety of fairly well-documented reasons (including fear of reprisal). Also, I'm not sure if it's necessary or productive to speak up every time. In the article I linked to, the harassment 'expert' said that there is a difference (especially legally) between a one-off, mild incident, for example when something might be said, and either (a) one very bad incident or (b) a pattern of repetition of milder ones.

That said, I did read about one scenario where a man went up to a woman after a meeting (at which she was the only woman) and said that he disapproved of something a man had said. It was suggested that this, whilst not unhelpful, was not enough, and might even put the woman in an awkward position (eg having to confirm whether she felt harassed/offended or not). It was suggested that if the same man found it daunting to call out the male 'offender' at the meeting, it might be better to approach another male colleague after the meeting (rather than the woman) and seek agreement from him that what was said was not good, and perhaps then agree to consider backing each other up if it happened again and one of them commented. I must admit I hadn't thought of that option, which seemed like quite a good way to make it easier to raise things openly.

Of course women could (and do) cooperate also, in a similar way, but not when they are the only woman at the meeting.

I once attended a meeting of mostly women (including a female chairperson) and just myself and another man, and he said something deemed sexist and he got politely but firmly rounded upon by all the women, to the point that I did not on that occasion feel the need to add anything. He wasn't a bad person, he just goofed and let slip something which could be described as 'gender traditionalist'. It was a philosophy seminar, which was meant to be about the topic of metaphors, but which became more about gender issues instead, at least for a few minutes. :)

To be fair - I would also like to add that some all women gatherings I have attended are complete male bashing sessions and complain fests. I do speak up at these. If it continues, I get up and leave. I am asked quite often to attend various "women groups" and unless there is a defined agenda I don't go. But these are complain fests about what males have or haven't done, not sexist statements.

Do you think that in today's social climate, female bashing sessions or male complainfests about what females have or haven't done could be more readily considered as representing sexist statements? Iow, do you think that women generally can get away with a bit more than men in this regard?
 
Last edited:
I don't think you can add the two figures like that? Even if they were all from the same workplace (which I don't think they were) I don't think you can add them. It depends what proportion of blue and white collar workers were asked, but if for example it was an equal number of each then the total would be 31% (midway between 38 and 24) admitting to one of the actions listed.
Regardless, around 30% is not small portion. For example, if 30% of a population had lung cancer, would you consider that a small portion? I know I wouldn't.
And yes, it is useful to distinguish between harassment and behaviour which may (or may not) be objectionable (ie is potentially objectionable). As the article says, "Misreporting might make the numbers too low. Counting harmless actions might make them too high".
Why is it useful if the relevant issue is the effect on the target?
 
Today on Sexist in the City we discuss how some people seek to define "male culture" as the bad that some men do, and how others seek to define Male as responsible behaviour. We also discuss how some state how men who fail to stand up for others are a problem, without mentioning women who fail to stand up for others, and some who react defensively when women who fail to stand up for others do get added to this sentiment.
Ah, the old tu quogue fallacy in action.
We explore why some people claim false equivalency when others include women in those who should stand up for people, but do not claim false equivalency when rape and a wide spectrum of words and gestures are grouped together in "studies" in order to inflate statistics, or when good men are grouped with bad.
Ah, the old "waaah, not all men" fallacy.
 
I don't think you can add the two figures like that? Even if they were all from the same workplace (which I don't think they were) I don't think you can add them. It depends what proportion of blue and white collar workers were asked, but if for example it was an equal number of each then the total would be 31% (midway between 38 and 24) admitting to one of the actions listed.
Regardless, around 30% is not small portion. For example, if 30% of a population had lung cancer, would you consider that a small portion? I know I wouldn't.

It includes men who have told a dirty joke or jokes in the last year. If you want to label such a person a harasser, that's fine. I'm not sure how many people would agree with you that that was reasonable or useful. The so-called harassment expert in the article would not quite seem to go that far.

And yes, it is useful to distinguish between harassment and behaviour which may (or may not) be objectionable (ie is potentially objectionable). As the article says, "Misreporting might make the numbers too low. Counting harmless actions might make them too high".
Why is it useful if the relevant issue is the effect on the target?

I think you are concluding that harmless only meant 'not deemed harmful by the person acting or speaking'. I'm not sure why you would do that.
 
Sure women don't say anything - they should, however, in my experience more opportunities to speak up are with men.

Sounds fair.

Imo, it isn't generally easy for either sex to speak up, for a variety of fairly well-documented reasons (including fear of reprisal). Also, I'm not sure if it's necessary or productive to speak up every time. In the article I linked to, the harassment 'expert' said that there is a difference (especially legally) between a one-off, mild incident, for example when something might be said, and either (a) one very bad incident or (b) a pattern of repetition of milder ones.

That said, I did read about one scenario where a man went up to a woman after a meeting (at which she was the only woman) and said that he disapproved of something a man had said. It was suggested that this, whilst not unhelpful, was not enough, and might even put the woman in an awkward position (eg having to confirm whether she felt harassed/offended or not). It was suggested that if the same man found it daunting to call out the male 'offender' at the meeting, it might be better to approach another male colleague after the meeting (rather than the woman) and seek agreement from him that what was said was not good, and perhaps then agree to consider backing each other up if it happened again and one of them commented. I must admit I hadn't thought of that option, which seemed like quite a good way to make it easier to raise things openly.

Of course women could (and do) cooperate also, in a similar way, but not when they are the only woman at the meeting.

I once attended a meeting of mostly women (including a female chairperson) and just myself and another man, and he said something deemed sexist and he got politely but firmly rounded upon by all the women, to the point that I did not on that occasion feel the need to add anything. He wasn't a bad person, he just goofed and let slip something which could be described as 'gender traditionalist'. It was a philosophy seminar, which was meant to be about the topic of metaphors, but which became more about gender issues instead, at least for a few minutes. :)

To be fair - I would also like to add that some all women gatherings I have attended are complete male bashing sessions and complain fests. I do speak up at these. If it continues, I get up and leave. I am asked quite often to attend various "women groups" and unless there is a defined agenda I don't go. But these are complain fests about what males have or haven't done, not sexist statements.

Do you think that in today's social climate, female bashing sessions or male complainfests about what females have or haven't done could be more readily considered as representing sexist statements? Iow, do you think that women generally can get away with a bit more than men in this regard?

I don't allow women to get away with this kind of behavior in my presence - so my view is biased - I am very out spoken. If women hide in a corner in a meeting then complain their voice is not heard - I tell them to speak up! Then they will complain that men interupt them - so, tell them not too. I hate women who play the victim and don't step up and sit at the table. To answer your question, I have never seen it in that light personally, but I suppose on some level it could be. As for letting women "get away with it", they don't in my presence.
 
It includes men who may have told a dirty joke in the last year. If you want to label such a person a harasser, that's fine. I'm not sure how many people would agree with you that that was reasonable or useful. The so-called harassment expert in the article would not quite seem to go that far.
And other experts would.
I think you are concluding that harmless only meant 'not deemed harmful by the person acting or speaking'. I'm not sure why you would do that.
You think wrong. I am saying that the relevant issue is not what the actor intended or thought, but what the target or recipient felt.
 
Back
Top Bottom