quote:

ORIGINAL: HeatherMcLeather
In fact, I would say that the majority of social and cultural influences on males is engineered to restrain that macho influence and propensity towards violence, not to promote it.

quote:


Let's take a look at two examples of what I am writing about here - the black community and the Taliban. Much of the oppression of black heterosexual men has not come from white people but from within their own community.

quote:

ORIGINAL: stellauk
Far more men are bothered about lesbians and two women having sex together and what pisses them off is that they're not involved or included.

quote:




However it is exactly this 'machismo' stereotype of traditional heterosexual male values which lies at the very core and root of all tyranny, oppression and exploitation.

quote:



This is that male social advantage, the culture of 'traditional' heterosexual masculinity which oppresses others on issues of gender - women, homosexuals, the transgendered and even specific heterosexual men - the submissive male characterized as the hen-pecked husband. This oppression or tyranny is constantly reinforced in numerous ways including sexist jokes and remarks, domestic violence, rape, homophobia, transphobia, etc.

quote:



Within this culture is one of toughness, being 'hard' and aggression which manifests itself in other forms of social violence such as racist attacks, soccer hooliganism, police brutality, human rights abuses, torture and war.

quote:



Not all heterosexual men accept or embrace this 'machismo' culture of traditional masculinity. Quite a number of men dismiss this as having anything to do with masculinity, many more reject this 'traditional' masculinity and do so quite vocally and openly through rebellion and dissent. Counter to this, 'machismo' is not just embraced by heterosexual men, but also by some women and homosexual men.

quote:



However globally, and with a high degree of consistency, it is heterosexual men who feel the need to assert their masculinity through violence and they make up the bulk of criminals throughout the world.

quote:



There is nothing natural or inborn about 'machismo'. It is not genetic, it's got nothing to do with our biology as humans or with our evolution and is therefore not something innate or fixed.

quote:


It is purely cultural, acquired, the predetermined product of social and cultural engineering created by specific institutions and those of certain ideologies which can be found for example throughout religion and politics.

quote:

ORIGINAL: stellauk

All issues concerning gender and sexual identity have one root cause - the denial of a socially acceptable culture of masculinity which would enable social cohesion and equality among people in terms of their sex and gender.

i believe that looking at gender as an either/or thing causes many problems.

The main issue is that all three, the homosexual, the lesbian and the TG are not conforming to 'traditional' male values and are behaving in ways which are different from what is generally perceived to be 'traditionally' masculine (or in the case of lesbians, feminine).

All three are typically regarded as deviations from the norm. But you seem to think conformity is a male value. Why male, more than female?

However it is exactly this 'machismo' stereotype of traditional heterosexual male values which lies at the very core and root of all tyranny, oppression and exploitation.

i think ignorance, apathy, greed, and politics are the root of all tyranny, oppression, and exploitation.


This is that male social advantage, the culture of 'traditional' heterosexual masculinity which oppresses others on issues of gender...

i agree that there is a male social advantage that causes problems for society. i wonder if we lived in a matriarchal world, whether THAT society would be any less oppressive, although it would certainly be different. i believe that all power is corruptive, no matter who holds it, and that prejudice against those different than oneself is not strictly a male trait.

Within this culture is one of toughness, being 'hard' and aggression which manifests itself in other forms of social violence such as racist attacks, soccer hooliganism, police brutality, human rights abuses, torture and war.

i won't hazard a guess as to whether those problems would still exist in a matriachal world. i will say- even if they wouldn't, i'm sure there would be any number of other problems, just as serious, to take their place.

Not all heterosexual men accept or embrace this 'machismo' culture of traditional masculinity. Quite a number of men dismiss this as having anything to do with masculinity, many more reject this 'traditional' masculinity and do so quite vocally and openly through rebellion and dissent. Counter to this, 'machismo' is not just embraced by heterosexual men, but also by some women and homosexual men.

i agree.

However globally, and with a high degree of consistency, it is heterosexual men who feel the need to assert their masculinity through violence and they make up the bulk of criminals throughout the world.

Criminals? Or violent criminals? i attribute the fact that men are more criminally violent than women to testosterone as well as culture.

There is nothing natural or inborn about 'machismo'. It is not genetic, it's got nothing to do with our biology as humans or with our evolution and is therefore not something innate or fixed.

i disagree. i believe there is some natural or inborn component to machismo. Males are more macho than females over most of the animal kingdom. i'm not saying that excuses the behavior in humans. i'm just saying, i don't think you're correct that machismo has NOTHING to do with biology or evolution.

It is purely cultural, acquired, the predetermined product of social and cultural engineering created by specific institutions and those of certain ideologies which can be found for example throughout religion and politics.

i disagree, same reason as above.

Throughout the world it is these institutions and ideologies which manipulate and encourage the raising and conditioning of boys quite differently from girls. Some of these differences include the broad social acceptance of rivalry, toughness, domination, and even in some cases violence in ways so that they are perceived as typically masculine traits and normal behaviour for boys.

Right through boyhood and puberty and teens these hard masculine values become reinforced and internalized so that the 'jack the lad' machismo is generally perceived to be the routine, legitimate right of passage towards manhood and even necessary to establish one's identity as a man.

Teenage boys and young men are often routinely discouraged from talking about their feelings, displaying emotions, being sensitive, gentle or employing such strategies as persuasion and conciliation to resolve conflicts. In many cultures it is these traits which are often seen as weakness, being 'soft' and are traits more commonly associated with women and gay men.

It's this culture (and often this particular aspect) of machismo which is the subject examined in popular culture, for example in films such as Ken Loach's 1969 film 'Kes', 'Billy Elliot', there's traces of it in 'The Full Monty', I wrote about it in one of my plays which later inspired the Polish film 'The Man Thing', and it's covered in songs such as Genesis's No Son Of Mine and far more poignantly in the Mike and the Mechanics hit The Living Years.

Even among the transgendered especially in stages of early transitioning towards womanhood and among some crossdressers and TVs one can sometimes perceive those who are struggling with this aspect of social conditioning - the rivalry, egotism, the sexualization of one's persona, competitiveness and male bitchiness. Homosexual men are culturally demasculinized and then attacked for failing to live up to this tough, rugged stereotype of masculinity. The social engineering and conditioning runs that deep, so deep that it affects all of us to some degree, irrespective of who we are as people.

Therefore within culture many boys are raised from a very early age to be competitive, strong, unyielding, aggressive. The idea that many problems have acceptable solutions through threats and violence become firmly entrenched in their psychology.

Cultural conditioning does profoundly influence human behavior.

This is also seen by many as a perfectly acceptable model for maintaining social order and even criminal justice - take the death penalty and support for capital punishment as an obvious example. Another example is support for corporal punishment and the 'clip round the ear'.

This artifically constructed culture of machismo lies at the very core for all oppression - irrespective of whether it is sexual, based on gender, social class, ethnicity, race. It is the root cause of social stigma and social division.

i maintain that there would still be oppression in a society based on any other set of values.

But it's important to remember that it's not just women who are victims here, or gays or the transsexuals, but quite often heterosexual men themselves. Think of all the column inches and publicity given to domestic violence and the oppression of women by men, but how much do you get to hear about domestic violence suffered by men perpetrated by women? How many fathers are denied custody or access to their kids in divorce courts? How many threads are started on these message boards by men who have become so wrapped up in the culture of machismo that they feel they cannot find a way to approach women?

Quite often the oppression turns in on itself so that the oppressor fails to realize that he himself is also among the oppressed, or vice versa.

Yes, both men and women are imposed on by the way society conditions them.

There is no such thing as a free society or democratic society because culture forms part of your identity and thinking and democracy is usually no more than two or three available choices of the established order. The only freedom you have is in how you express your individuality, and that in itself is relative. Freedom cannot exist when it is dependent on the oppression of others.

Then it cannot exist. I doubt it's possible to create a society where no one is oppressed.

There are two factors which this 'machismo' culture maintains its power over you and for its continuation.

The first is control of culture through the economy, politics and religion based on specific ideologies.

The second is a significant proportion of the population being socialized into the acceptance of machismo through embracing hard masculine values and the suppression of the values of passive strength, emotional self-expression and conciliation.

Even much of what constitutes human rights merely serves to maintain this social hierarchy and continue the oppression. Much in the same way as political correctness and positive discrimination which only serve to create further inequality and stimulate yet more competitiveness.

i'll grant you the above. It's just that i think any conceivable culture, no matter what its derivation, would do the same. Any culture would exert power over the economy, politics, religion, and condition its members to accept certain values and reject others. That's not just a characteristic of male dominated culture, it's a characteristic of culture at all- the fact that culture has that effect.

Take for example the whole gay rights and LGBT rights issue. It was back in June 1969 in New York during the Stonewall Riots that the machismo model of 'traditional heterosexual male values' was identified as the source of oppression of the LGBT community. Despite this, and more than fifty years later, much of what constitutes gay rights is an ongoing conflict between men over the penis and where it should or shouldn't be inserted.

Let's take a look at two examples of what I am writing about here - the black community and the Taliban. Much of the oppression of black heterosexual men has not come from white people but from within their own community. The same mechanism exists to maintain the Taliban. Observe that this oppression and ideologies serve not only to keep women in their place, but also men themselves.

How do you connect society's pressure to conform with machismo?

You can perhaps also see how much of the 'human rights' industry and the struggle for equality defeats itself by engaging in the conflict and thus continuing the rivalry and competitiveness which the institutions and ideologies behind machismo and this set of 'traditional' male heterosexual values feed off to maintain the oppression.

i do not think that rivalry is a strictly heterosexual male value.

This was the whole purpose of political correctness and also positive discrimination. It served to create further conflict and rivalry through the creation of further inequality.

i don't understand. Are you saying you think political correctness and positive discrimination were created soley to incite conflict and rivalry?

I would contend that a much more successful strategy is simply for heterosexual men to each individually reject this oppression by refusing to conform to these imposed traditional heterosexual male values. If other heterosexual men can do it successfully so too can others.

If they reject those values, what values should they replace them with?

My reasoning here is based on the premises of Polish philosopher and historian ideas Leszek Kolakowski made in his 1971 essay 'Theses on Hope and Hopelessness' which advocated that a mature and civilized society could only be created out of totalitarianism through independent, self-organized groups working individually towards a common objective. Kolakowski's works were banned in communist Poland but such premises heavily influenced those in the Polish Solidarity movement and can be seen to be a key factor in its success.

i suspect finding a "common objective" is going to be the tricky part.

More and more in my thinking I am becoming increasingly sceptical of this need for a greater degree of equality and tolerance in society.

I don't see it. We are not born equal, we are born individual. I cannot see the point of campaigning for greater equality or acceptance for minority groups because what I see from doing this is that all you are doing is buying into the oppression and totalitarianism in forcing others to think in certain ways and to accept things which they may not find acceptable.

Society is never going to change as a whole to facilitate that greater degree of equality or acceptance because our innate individuality prevents that. You cannot change society or the world - all you can do is to change your perception of the way society is and the world.

Such is the cause of male liberation. There is no need for petitions, lobbying, demonstrations, social or political activism or long marches. There is not any need for any of the struggles that women have gone through or any other minority group.

It is simply a case of individual acknowledgment, recognition and acceptance.

It is simply a matter for recognition and acceptance of the fact that there is such a culture which exists and which oppresses us all equally, irrespective of who we are.

i can recognize that.

It is simply a matter of choosing whether to reject this culture of 'machismo' as being a socially acceptable model of traditional male values or not, and to replace it with acceptance of freedom of individual identity and personal self-expression not just for yourself, but for everybody else too.

You're entering into Hannah's territory.

This carries with it the respect for individual personal preferences, both your own and that of other people, even if it doesn't fit in with or agree with your own personal preferences or hierarchy or moral, social or cultural beliefs.

i think that's what many minority groups are already doing when they campaign for greater equality and acceptance. i think many only want to be AS accepted as anyone else, not to be more so.

This also means divorcing yourself from any notion that anything can be traditionally or typically masculine or feminine, and that both femininity and masculinity can be as individual as any human being.

i can accept that both femininity and masculinity CAN be as individual as any human being. i do not think i can accept that there is no such thing as "typically masculine" or "typically feminine". To me, that would mean that there is no average of traits for each gender, and i think that there is.