What does it mean to be a man?

[Safferz]

Wadani;950299 wrote:

Men and women are not equal ee sidaa ula soco.

What was that, Wadani? :mad:

[Safferz]

Chimera;951060 wrote:

It means to be a loyal son, a loving grandson, a caring brother, a cherished cousin, a vital pillar of the family. It means striving to be a good husband and an even greater father.

+2. Not feeling the gender essentialism in the other posts.

[Wadani]

Safferz;951127 wrote:

+2. Not feeling the gender essentialism in the other posts.

That's because u and society at large don't want men to be men anymore, lest their unfettered nature offends the prevailing liberal sensibilities of the 'elite'.

[Safferz]

Wadani;951130 wrote:

That's because u and society at large don't want men to be men anymore, lest their unfettered nature offends the prevailing liberal sensibilities of the 'elite'.

No, it's just that it's clear that what it is to "be a man" is socially constructed, historically shifting and culturally specific. I don't know what it means to be a man, because a man (and a woman) can be any number of things, your genitals don't determine that. "Manhood," like "womanhood," is a social construction.

 

Case in point -- do "real men" hold another man's hand, in your view?

[Wadani]

Safferz;951137 wrote:

No, it's just that it's clear that what it is to "be a man" is

socially constructed

, historically shifting and culturally specific. I don't know what it means to be a man, because a man (and a woman) can be any number of things, your genitals don't determine that. "Manhood," like "womanhood," is a

social construction

.

There u go again with ur postmodern-liberal-elitist-hogwash. I'm partially trolling btw, but only partially. loool.

[DoctorKenney]

LOL Safferz is such a Liberal. It's actually shocking.

 

Men such as Ryan Seacrest and Perez Hilton are also "male", but I doubt most people would consider then real men.

[Wadani]

Safferz;951137 wrote:

No, it's just that it's clear that what it is to "be a man" is socially constructed, historically shifting and culturally specific. I don't know what it means to be a man, because a man (and a woman) can be any number of things, your genitals don't determine that. "Manhood," like "womanhood," is a social construction.

 

Case in point -- do "real men" hold another man's hand, in your view

?

Ofcourse they do in Somalia and the Middle East. What's ur point?

[Safferz]

Wadani;951182 wrote:

Ofcourse they do in Somalia and the Middle East. What's ur point?

And as you know, many societies (like ours in North America) would find that strange and disqualify them as "real men" for it. My point is that ideas about masculinity vary across space and time, so there's really no answer to the question posed by the OP.

[Safferz]

Wadani;951140 wrote:

There u go again with ur postmodern-liberal-elitist-hogwash. I'm partially trolling btw, but only partially. loool.

 

...ee sida uula soco. Add Judith Butler's "Gender Trouble" to that list of recommended books

[Safferz]

Apophis;951186 wrote:

Man and masculinity is defined by nature

Except it's not, societies define masculinity and femininity and that's historical fact. Pink was a boys' colour until ~1940.

[Safferz]

I thought you studied politics, Apophis? As someone who studied a social science, you should be keenly aware of how societies develop cultures, mores, roles, ideologies, institutions, organizations, etc. These are not a priori realities, they are constructions that change over time and differ across societies/cultural contexts. Gender, too, is a construction, and to say there's anything natural about what societies decide are appropriate behaviours/roles for men and women is empirically false.

[DoctorKenney]

After listening to this, I've decided that if I ever have children, I'm gonna do everything in my power to prevent them from studying "sociology" or "social sciences" in University. Your Professors indoctrinated you to buy their B.S., and it's sickening to witness this on SOL. You would've been better off studying Chemistry or Engineering, not this crap.

 

Men are the way they are due to human nature, and so are women. You could put a few men and women on a desert island, and within a few years you'll notice that men and women naturally fulfill different roles. To think otherwise is to deny reality, and I'm actually offended to be reading this.

[Salahudin]

Reeyo, below u will find a real man...Al, the brother lives in ur neck of the woods...u should have shaah with the brother...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIhxwdc9pGU

[Safferz]

lol, only on SOL do people fail to differentiate between biology and sociology. But by all means, continue believing gender roles are fixed and natural.

[underdog]

Safferz;951211 wrote:

lol, only on SOL do people fail to differentiate between biology and sociology. But by all means, continue believing gender roles are fixed and natural.

Safferz, I think you're missing the point. It may true that gender roles are not fixed but the real issue is need for role reversal.

 

Professional women earning good salaries is the fastest growing demographic in North America.

 

The role of the male as the sole provider has all but vanished in major cities and that's OK ...IF that is what people want.

 

However, am I wrong to say I prefer the scenario where a man goes out and provides for his family while his wife stays home and takes care of the home front? is this insulting to women?