Tackling a Culture of Sexism

[Spanky]

Eight more pages until we double up to 34.

And still haven't gotten to tackling.

I like what Robby Hauck and Gavin Robertson bring to the table at Safety. Would not want to be a receiver going up and getting a rib shot from one of those guys. Both seem to have good form as well as instincts to make the play. Good grabs for the defense!

Kem, now Doc got us on tackling!

 

[kemajic]

I'm beginning to understand why so many of you are SO pissed. You really DO believe that putting a stop to sexism is about putting a stop to sexuality and sexual relationships; flirting, connecting, enjoying each other.

Well sure, what else would the average guy think? So much of our masculine identity is naturally, biologically connected to our sexuality. And then we're told that our sexual nature the problem. In other words, that the problem is engrained in us permanently and we're all guilty and toxic just because we're male. So we're told that the cure for sexism is for us to stop being so masculine. And while we're at it, that the solution to racism is to stop being so white. And the solution to ageism is to stop being so young. And the solution to xenophobia is to stop being so American, and so on.

So yes, it does piss us off because the whole point seems to be to try to force us to stop being who we are and instead embrace someone else's group approved identity for us. I will not do that.

I can't tell you how much I appreciate a clear and succinct explanation of what many of you are experiencing in the current culture. It helps. But, just because an issue within society has been clinically termed, "toxic masculinity" does not in any way imply that masculinity is toxic. In fact, toxic masculinity is something that as much or more damaging to men than to women. I'll spare you the psychological jargon and we can make it all about football. I LOVE the game of football and its multitude of metaphors for life.

To stop talking to female coworkers or connecting with them on a personal level of any sort would be the equivalent of this:

A flag is thrown and a player is penalized for excessive celebration. He decides that, from that point forward, he will no longer celebrate when his team wins. He won't express happiness if he makes a game-winning touchdown reception. He will refrain from expressing joy when his team gets a first down.

Or, a wide receiver jumps the gun and is charged with a false start. From then on, he chooses to never step foot past the line of scrimmage - just too risky.

This is where we are on this sexism discussion. On one extreme end, we have a few refs out there throwing flags willy-nilly because they just KNOW that those big-ass D-Linemen will eventually f*** up anyway. SO, they just need to be constantly penalized and not given a chance to play the game.

On the other side, we have a couple of jack-asses running all over the field, ramming everyone with their helmets, flipping off the coaches, mooning the crowd and punching opponents in the nuts ('member that one time that happened to Dave DeCoite?)

Pretty hard to stop the flag-happy pessimists when the game is disrupted by the nut puncher.
Pretty hard to stop the flag-thrower when you have loud mouth a-holes with severe psychological damage running around, trying their best to sabotage any cooperative efforts.

But, you see, most of us want to discuss the substantial and important stuff: when does a receiver become a runner? Was his toe still in bounds when he was in control of the ball? Did the ball cross the goal line before or after his knee hit the turf?

We will spend hours playing and replaying video, having lively respectful discussion about the minutiae in a game - no hostility or anger if we can't agree or see things exactly as others do.

What you may be missing is that many would miss socializing with people of the opposite sex they don't need to trust about as much as they would miss unnecessary celebration on the field for something the players are expected to do. And that preference should offend no one; it is no one else's business. It does not deserve criticism. There is nothing wrong with sticking to business or in your analogy, sticking to the fundamentals of the game. Someone else can add the humor or zuzz.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

Hahaha... I've had some friends that have been afraid to talk to women... but some of you guys are REALLY afraid to talk to women... or just don't like them...

It's not about being afraid to talk to women. It's being afraid of being wrongfully accused. If three-toed sloths in the office filed complaints for compliments in record numbers, I wouldn't make small talk with three-toed sloths, either.

 

[GGNez]

I'm beginning to understand why so many of you are SO pissed. You really DO believe that putting a stop to sexism is about putting a stop to sexuality and sexual relationships; flirting, connecting, enjoying each other.

Well sure, what else would the average guy think? So much of our masculine identity is naturally, biologically connected to our sexuality. And then we're told that our sexual nature the problem. In other words, that the problem is engrained in us permanently and we're all guilty and toxic just because we're male. So we're told that the cure for sexism is for us to stop being so masculine. And while we're at it, that the solution to racism is to stop being so white. And the solution to ageism is to stop being so young. And the solution to xenophobia is to stop being so American, and so on.

So yes, it does piss us off because the whole point seems to be to try to force us to stop being who we are and instead embrace someone else's group approved identity for us. I will not do that.

I can't tell you how much I appreciate a clear and succinct explanation of what many of you are experiencing in the current culture. It helps. But, just because an issue within society has been clinically termed, "toxic masculinity" does not in any way imply that masculinity is toxic. In fact, toxic masculinity is something that as much or more damaging to men than to women. I'll spare you the psychological jargon and we can make it all about football. I LOVE the game of football and its multitude of metaphors for life.

To stop talking to female coworkers or connecting with them on a personal level of any sort would be the equivalent of this:

A flag is thrown and a player is penalized for excessive celebration. He decides that, from that point forward, he will no longer celebrate when his team wins. He won't express happiness if he makes a game-winning touchdown reception. He will refrain from expressing joy when his team gets a first down.

Or, a wide receiver jumps the gun and is charged with a false start. From then on, he chooses to never step foot past the line of scrimmage - just too risky.

This is where we are on this sexism discussion. On one extreme end, we have a few refs out there throwing flags willy-nilly because they just KNOW that those big-ass D-Linemen will eventually f*** up anyway. SO, they just need to be constantly penalized and not given a chance to play the game.

On the other side, we have a couple of jack-asses running all over the field, ramming everyone with their helmets, flipping off the coaches, mooning the crowd and punching opponents in the nuts ('member that one time that happened to Dave DeCoite?)

Pretty hard to stop the flag-happy pessimists when the game is disrupted by the nut puncher.
Pretty hard to stop the flag-thrower when you have loud mouth a-holes with severe psychological damage running around, trying their best to sabotage any cooperative efforts.

But, you see, most of us want to discuss the substantial and important stuff: when does a receiver become a runner? Was his toe still in bounds when he was in control of the ball? Did the ball cross the goal line before or after his knee hit the turf?

We will spend hours playing and replaying video, having lively respectful discussion about the minutiae in a game - no hostility or anger if we can't agree or see things exactly as others do.

What you may be missing is that many would miss socializing with people of the opposite sex they don't need to trust about as much as they would miss unnecessary celebration on the field for something the players are expected to do. And that preference should offend no one; it is no one else's business. It does not deserve criticism. There is nothing wrong with sticking to business or in your analogy, sticking to the fundamentals of the game. Someone else can add the humor or zuzz.

Agreed. Nothing wrong with keeping work relationships all about work.

I prefer to know the people I spend my day with on a more personal level. Some don't.

I just think in most cases, the fear comes from a lack of understanding of the meaning of harassment.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

I'm beginning to understand why so many of you are SO pissed. You really DO believe that putting a stop to sexism is about putting a stop to sexuality and sexual relationships; flirting, connecting, enjoying each other.

Well sure, what else would the average guy think? So much of our masculine identity is naturally, biologically connected to our sexuality. And then we're told that our sexual nature the problem. In other words, that the problem is engrained in us permanently and we're all guilty and toxic just because we're male. So we're told that the cure for sexism is for us to stop being so masculine. And while we're at it, that the solution to racism is to stop being so white. And the solution to ageism is to stop being so young. And the solution to xenophobia is to stop being so American, and so on.

So yes, it does piss us off because the whole point seems to be to try to force us to stop being who we are and instead embrace someone else's group approved identity for us. I will not do that.

I can't tell you how much I appreciate a clear and succinct explanation of what many of you are experiencing in the current culture. It helps. But, just because an issue within society has been clinically termed, "toxic masculinity" does not in any way imply that masculinity is toxic. In fact, toxic masculinity is something that as much or more damaging to men than to women. I'll spare you the psychological jargon and we can make it all about football. I LOVE the game of football and its multitude of metaphors for life.

To stop talking to female coworkers or connecting with them on a personal level of any sort would be the equivalent of this:

A flag is thrown and a player is penalized for excessive celebration. He decides that, from that point forward, he will no longer celebrate when his team wins. He won't express happiness if he makes a game-winning touchdown reception. He will refrain from expressing joy when his team gets a first down.

Or, a wide receiver jumps the gun and is charged with a false start. From then on, he chooses to never step foot past the line of scrimmage - just too risky.

This is where we are on this sexism discussion. On one extreme end, we have a few refs out there throwing flags willy-nilly because they just KNOW that those big-ass D-Linemen will eventually f*** up anyway. SO, they just need to be constantly penalized and not given a chance to play the game.

On the other side, we have a couple of jack-asses running all over the field, ramming everyone with their helmets, flipping off the coaches, mooning the crowd and punching opponents in the nuts ('member that one time that happened to Dave DeCoite?)

Pretty hard to stop the flag-happy pessimists when the game is disrupted by the nut puncher.
Pretty hard to stop the flag-thrower when you have loud mouth a-holes with severe psychological damage running around, trying their best to sabotage any cooperative efforts.

But, you see, most of us want to discuss the substantial and important stuff: when does a receiver become a runner? Was his toe still in bounds when he was in control of the ball? Did the ball cross the goal line before or after his knee hit the turf?

We will spend hours playing and replaying video, having lively respectful discussion about the minutiae in a game - no hostility or anger if we can't agree or see things exactly as others do.

What you may be missing is that many would miss socializing with people of the opposite sex they don't need to trust about as much as they would miss unnecessary celebration on the field for something the players are expected to do. And that preference should offend no one; it is no one else's business. It does not deserve criticism. There is nothing wrong with sticking to business or in your analogy, sticking to the fundamentals of the game. Someone else can add the humor or zuzz.

Fucking phenomenal point, right there. There are parts of this new way of things that are quite pleasant. Nobody hangs out in the doorway. Someone derogatorily called me Ron Swanson the other day, and I nearly teared up. It was the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me.

 

[GGNez]

Well sure, what else would the average guy think? So much of our masculine identity is naturally, biologically connected to our sexuality. And then we're told that our sexual nature the problem. In other words, that the problem is engrained in us permanently and we're all guilty and toxic just because we're male. So we're told that the cure for sexism is for us to stop being so masculine. And while we're at it, that the solution to racism is to stop being so white. And the solution to ageism is to stop being so young. And the solution to xenophobia is to stop being so American, and so on.

So yes, it does piss us off because the whole point seems to be to try to force us to stop being who we are and instead embrace someone else's group approved identity for us. I will not do that.

I can't tell you how much I appreciate a clear and succinct explanation of what many of you are experiencing in the current culture. It helps. But, just because an issue within society has been clinically termed, "toxic masculinity" does not in any way imply that masculinity is toxic. In fact, toxic masculinity is something that as much or more damaging to men than to women. I'll spare you the psychological jargon and we can make it all about football. I LOVE the game of football and its multitude of metaphors for life.

To stop talking to female coworkers or connecting with them on a personal level of any sort would be the equivalent of this:

A flag is thrown and a player is penalized for excessive celebration. He decides that, from that point forward, he will no longer celebrate when his team wins. He won't express happiness if he makes a game-winning touchdown reception. He will refrain from expressing joy when his team gets a first down.

Or, a wide receiver jumps the gun and is charged with a false start. From then on, he chooses to never step foot past the line of scrimmage - just too risky.

This is where we are on this sexism discussion. On one extreme end, we have a few refs out there throwing flags willy-nilly because they just KNOW that those big-ass D-Linemen will eventually f*** up anyway. SO, they just need to be constantly penalized and not given a chance to play the game.

On the other side, we have a couple of jack-asses running all over the field, ramming everyone with their helmets, flipping off the coaches, mooning the crowd and punching opponents in the nuts ('member that one time that happened to Dave DeCoite?)

Pretty hard to stop the flag-happy pessimists when the game is disrupted by the nut puncher.
Pretty hard to stop the flag-thrower when you have loud mouth a-holes with severe psychological damage running around, trying their best to sabotage any cooperative efforts.

But, you see, most of us want to discuss the substantial and important stuff: when does a receiver become a runner? Was his toe still in bounds when he was in control of the ball? Did the ball cross the goal line before or after his knee hit the turf?

We will spend hours playing and replaying video, having lively respectful discussion about the minutiae in a game - no hostility or anger if we can't agree or see things exactly as others do.

What you may be missing is that many would miss socializing with people of the opposite sex they don't need to trust about as much as they would miss unnecessary celebration on the field for something the players are expected to do. And that preference should offend no one; it is no one else's business. It does not deserve criticism. There is nothing wrong with sticking to business or in your analogy, sticking to the fundamentals of the game. Someone else can add the humor or zuzz.

f***[*] phenomenal point, right there. There are parts of this new way of things that are quite pleasant. Nobody hangs out in the doorway. Someone derogatorily called me Ron Swanson the other day, and I nearly teared up. It was the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me.

:lol: :lol:

Agree with this too. Just pointing out that rules are in place because of the relatively rare circumstances that they are needed and the relatively few individuals who lack common sense.
How often do we need to know exactly how many steps a receiver must take before becoming a runner? Not often. Was pretty critical in a recent game.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

Well sure, what else would the average guy think? So much of our masculine identity is naturally, biologically connected to our sexuality. And then we're told that our sexual nature the problem. In other words, that the problem is engrained in us permanently and we're all guilty and toxic just because we're male. So we're told that the cure for sexism is for us to stop being so masculine. And while we're at it, that the solution to racism is to stop being so white. And the solution to ageism is to stop being so young. And the solution to xenophobia is to stop being so American, and so on.

So yes, it does piss us off because the whole point seems to be to try to force us to stop being who we are and instead embrace someone else's group approved identity for us. I will not do that.

I can't tell you how much I appreciate a clear and succinct explanation of what many of you are experiencing in the current culture. It helps. But, just because an issue within society has been clinically termed, "toxic masculinity" does not in any way imply that masculinity is toxic. In fact, toxic masculinity is something that as much or more damaging to men than to women. I'll spare you the psychological jargon and we can make it all about football. I LOVE the game of football and its multitude of metaphors for life.

To stop talking to female coworkers or connecting with them on a personal level of any sort would be the equivalent of this:

A flag is thrown and a player is penalized for excessive celebration. He decides that, from that point forward, he will no longer celebrate when his team wins. He won't express happiness if he makes a game-winning touchdown reception. He will refrain from expressing joy when his team gets a first down.

Or, a wide receiver jumps the gun and is charged with a false start. From then on, he chooses to never step foot past the line of scrimmage - just too risky.

This is where we are on this sexism discussion. On one extreme end, we have a few refs out there throwing flags willy-nilly because they just KNOW that those big-ass D-Linemen will eventually f*** up anyway. SO, they just need to be constantly penalized and not given a chance to play the game.

On the other side, we have a couple of jack-asses running all over the field, ramming everyone with their helmets, flipping off the coaches, mooning the crowd and punching opponents in the nuts ('member that one time that happened to Dave DeCoite?)

Pretty hard to stop the flag-happy pessimists when the game is disrupted by the nut puncher.
Pretty hard to stop the flag-thrower when you have loud mouth a-holes with severe psychological damage running around, trying their best to sabotage any cooperative efforts.

But, you see, most of us want to discuss the substantial and important stuff: when does a receiver become a runner? Was his toe still in bounds when he was in control of the ball? Did the ball cross the goal line before or after his knee hit the turf?

We will spend hours playing and replaying video, having lively respectful discussion about the minutiae in a game - no hostility or anger if we can't agree or see things exactly as others do.

What you may be missing is that many would miss socializing with people of the opposite sex they don't need to trust about as much as they would miss unnecessary celebration on the field for something the players are expected to do. And that preference should offend no one; it is no one else's business. It does not deserve criticism. There is nothing wrong with sticking to business or in your analogy, sticking to the fundamentals of the game. Someone else can add the humor or zuzz.

Agreed. Nothing wrong with keeping work relationships all about work.

I prefer to know the people I spend my day with on a more personal level. Some don't.

I just think in most cases, the fear comes from a lack of understanding of the meaning of harassment.

Could not disagree more. It comes from the fact that someone else's completely subjective, fluid, and often times incorrect definition of harassment is the controlling definition in any situation. My definition, right or wrong, is immaterial.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Could not disagree more. It comes from the fact that someone else's completely subjective, fluid, and often times incorrect definition of harassment is the controlling definition in any situation. My definition, right or wrong, is immaterial.

Precisely. "Offended" is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[GGNez]

Could not disagree more. It comes from the fact that someone else's completely subjective, fluid, and often times incorrect definition of harassment is the controlling definition in any situation. My definition, right or wrong, is immaterial.

Precisely. "Offended" is in the eye of the beholder.

I understand the point you're making.

But, to operate as if regular conversation is going to be twisted into a harassment lawsuit and that a workplace is a social landmine because of a very minute number of women who are looking to hurt good men based on their experiences with some bad ones is an overblown reaction.

I still accept an occasional date with someone I've met online, despite the fact that there DOES exist the possibility that I may be murdered. Women DO get murdered by men occasionally. Many more than men get sued for harassment for telling a woman that they like her haircut. Overblown, exaggerated responses to a miniscule threat takes away from the real problem here.

I didn't deserve, at age 16, to have my 28 year old boss remark about my ass or boobs nearly every day at work. I didn't possess the confidence or understanding that his behavior was extremely out of line and didn't want to risk losing my job. Times have gradually changed since then and I think it's a good thing that men and women communicate person-to-person. If a man sees women as an object to be conquered or possessed, they behave accordingly and it's not right. That's the long and short of it. Hopefully, you'd want your 16 year old daughter to know that she doesn't have to put up with that at work. Certainly, if my son had a female coworker accuse him of being offensive for telling her she looks nice, I'd back him 100%.

Should be simple.

 

[Spanky]

GG, you fail to mention that often the female makes aggressive moves in office situations and otherwise. The standard should apply to both men and women.

 

[reinell30]

GG, you fail to mention that often the female makes aggressive moves in office situations and otherwise. The standard should apply to both men and women.

The standard does apply to both men and women. The big difference is, men won't (or rarely) yell harassment. I am not sure the percentage of harassment complaints but I would be willing to bet that most complaints are from women and would total around 95% of complaints filed.

 

[grizfnz]

Could not disagree more. It comes from the fact that someone else's completely subjective, fluid, and often times incorrect definition of harassment is the controlling definition in any situation. My definition, right or wrong, is immaterial.

Precisely. "Offended" is in the eye of the beholder.

I understand the point you're making.

But, to operate as if regular conversation is going to be twisted into a harassment lawsuit and that a workplace is a social landmine because of a very minute number of women who are looking to hurt good men based on their experiences with some bad ones is an overblown reaction.

I still accept an occasional date with someone I've met online, despite the fact that there DOES exist the possibility that I may be murdered. Women DO get murdered by men occasionally. Many more than men get sued for harassment for telling a woman that they like her haircut. Overblown, exaggerated responses to a miniscule threat takes away from the real problem here.

I didn't deserve, at age 16, to have my 28 year old boss remark about my ass or boobs nearly every day at work. I didn't possess the confidence or understanding that his behavior was extremely out of line and didn't want to risk losing my job. Times have gradually changed since then and I think it's a good thing that men and women communicate person-to-person. If a man sees women as an object to be conquered or possessed, they behave accordingly and it's not right. That's the long and short of it. Hopefully, you'd want your 16 year old daughter to know that she doesn't have to put up with that at work. Certainly, if my son had a female coworker accuse him of being offensive for telling her she looks nice, I'd back him 100%.

Should be simple.

100% support these days means being prepared to cash in your 401k and get a second on the house to help pay for legal representation. The poor souls (hesitant to use the word bastards to avoid offending those who may have grown up without a father) without any financial resources are SOL.
Like many issues in society today, the pendulum has swung too far the other way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GGNez]

GG, you fail to mention that often the female makes aggressive moves in office situations and otherwise. The standard should apply to both men and women.

My failure to mention it isn’t because I don’t recognize it.

Look at what happened to Detective Shermer when he reported the woman harassing him at work. He was mercilessly taunted for being a p*ssy and not man enough to take it or, even, enjoy it.

That’s a big reason men don’t report. The same types who harass women also mock men if they report sexual harassment.

 

[Spanky]

GG, you fail to mention that often the female makes aggressive moves in office situations and otherwise. The standard should apply to both men and women.

The standard does apply to both men and women. The big difference is, men won't (or rarely) yell harassment. I am not sure the percentage of harassment complaints but I would be willing to bet that most complaints are from women and would total around 95% of complaints filed.

30, some in Missoula are up in arms about athletes or perhaps Griz football players. They are correct about zero tolerance in the instance of rape or harassment, but what about the pretty young ladies, or sometimes older ladies that make themselves openly available to the athletes?

 

[reinell30]

GG, you fail to mention that often the female makes aggressive moves in office situations and otherwise. The standard should apply to both men and women.

The standard does apply to both men and women. The big difference is, men won't (or rarely) yell harassment. I am not sure the percentage of harassment complaints but I would be willing to bet that most complaints are from women and would total around 95% of complaints filed.

30, some in Missoula are up in arms about athletes or perhaps Griz football players. They are correct about zero tolerance in the instance of rape or harassment, but what about the pretty young ladies, or sometimes older ladies that make themselves openly available to the athletes?

Athletes are no different then non-athletes. Every person has to make the right decisions regardless of position. Yes there are those who make false claims just because someone is an athlete. In these situations, the false claim person needs to be punished, however you know this rarely happens. It is illegal to make false reports. But when was the last time you heard of someone getting punished for false reporting?
Because of their positions as athletes, they do have to be smarter when it comes to the opposite sex, fair or not, it is just the way it is.
Those up in arms in Missoula are the same as the ones up in arms in every college town. They don't like athletes and will make accusations against' them any time they can. When it comes time to prove their points, they kind of turn into blowhards with no evidence what so ever. I think most of the blowhards in Missoula have it in for Bobby and they can't get over the fact he is our coach. They aren't happy unless they are complaining about him or the program. You can't change their views, just sit back and laugh at them...
Remember the story of the little boy who cried wolf?

 

[Ringneck]

To stop talking to female coworkers or connecting with them on a personal level of any sort would be the equivalent of this:

A flag is thrown and a player is penalized for excessive celebration. He decides that, from that point forward, he will no longer celebrate when his team wins. He won't express happiness if he makes a game-winning touchdown reception. He will refrain from expressing joy when his team gets a first down.

Or, a wide receiver jumps the gun and is charged with a false start. From then on, he chooses to never step foot past the line of scrimmage - just too risky.

This is where we are on this sexism discussion. On one extreme end, we have a few refs out there throwing flags willy-nilly because they just KNOW that those big-ass D-Linemen will eventually f*** up anyway. SO, they just need to be constantly penalized and not given a chance to play the game.

On the other side, we have a couple of jack-asses running all over the field, ramming everyone with their helmets, flipping off the coaches, mooning the crowd and punching opponents in the nuts ('member that one time that happened to Dave DeCoite?)

Pretty hard to stop the flag-happy pessimists when the game is disrupted by the nut puncher.
Pretty hard to stop the flag-thrower when you have loud mouth a-holes with severe psychological damage running around, trying their best to sabotage any cooperative efforts.

I agree with your last three paragraphs I quoted here, or I at least understand the point you're making. But I think the analogies in the first three paragraphs miss the mark a bit.

When it comes to this topic of "toxic masculinity," the analogy is more like this: A certain player violates the rules with excessive celebration, but rather than he alone receiving the penalty, each player on his team is also individually flagged because they are associated with him, but for no other (good) reason. Because this one schmuck lacked self-control and sound judgment, the rest of his teammates also receive personal fouls, and from now on will be watched with suspicion and held to an arbitrarily determined, nebulous standard. So from that point forward, none of his teammates celebrate when they win. None of them are happy about scoring a touchdown, getting a first down, or even suiting up and running out of the tunnel. They are unsure of whose standards they should be following and are afraid to offend one of the refs and bring a penalty on themselves and their teammates.

Let's move the discussion off the field, now: As a result of all the allegations against men, many men become weak, irresponsible, and passive. They learn to keep their thoughts to themselves, mind their own business, and say nothing to anyone. They don't take initiative, they don't look out for others, and they do as little as possible to get by. They don't know who to trust or confide in, and they become a shell of the person they could be if they were allowed to be themselves. There is danger in self-expression when you have been told you are the problem, and that you are "toxic."

As hard as it may be to silence the "nut puncher" or the "flag thrower," a rational, reasonable, human being can see they do not represent the group and would not label them as such. But that's the problem. Those who are throwing out the "culture of sexism" and "toxic masculinity" labels are not rational, reasonable human beings. They are intellectually lazy. They demand that others tolerate their worldview but refuse to tolerate (and even vilify) others whose worldview doesn't agree with theirs. This is morally inconsistent, and they should be called out for it.

The "toxic masculinity" label is an unwarranted generalization: just because something may be true of one man in one instance, it is not true of all men in all instances. This is flagrant sexism.

 

[Ringneck]

Agreed. Nothing wrong with keeping work relationships all about work.

I prefer to know the people I spend my day with on a more personal level. Some don't.

I just think in most cases, the fear comes from a lack of understanding of the meaning of harassment.

Could not disagree more. It comes from the fact that someone else's completely subjective, fluid, and often times incorrect definition of harassment is the controlling definition in any situation. My definition, right or wrong, is immaterial.

Well said.

 

[PlayerRep]

A few thoughts:

1. I have to admit that I agree with some of what Ringneck said in this part of his post: "So much of our masculine identity is naturally, biologically connected to our sexuality. And then we're told that our sexual nature the problem. In other words, that the problem is engrained in us permanently and we're all guilty and toxic just because we're male. So we're told that the cure for sexism is for us to stop being so masculine."

I looked up the term toxic masculinity, which I had never heard or noticed before, and saw that it has come out of some aspect of medicine. I'm sorry but that term is never going to be understood or accepted by most men. Looks way too much like BS.

I'm sorry, but boys are going to be boys. That doesn't include or excuse sexual assault, criminality or extreme things. But there is a lot of boy behavior beyond that. That is going to include noticing and being attracted to women, including how they look. That can't occur in the work place anymore, as it is illegal harassment, and that's okay.

2. The current stuff involving mere allegations being accepted as fact or truth, even if posted in social media, has made the problems and risks much greater.

3. I'm with CDA on this one now. Just not worth the risk, especially in the workplace. Also, drinking with workers has become more risky. A misconstrued comment, an attempt at a joke, an unfortunate tap on the back, and a dumb comment coming from alcohol.

4. While not intending to blame anyone or any movement for this, it is just a fact that, for now, women, especially young ones, are inadvertently going to lose some opportunities to socialize, network and travel.

5. Also, look at the disagreements and misunderstandings just in this thread. Huge disagreement. While egriz and many comments are and have been filled with sexism, and I assume some people post extreme things just to try to be funny, the disagreement is very wide.

6. If the Lisa Daveys of the world think that football and sports are part of whatever term (BS term, in my view) she wants to use, I will never agree with her.

7. I am learning some things in this discussion, tho, and not just from GG.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

Could not disagree more. It comes from the fact that someone else's completely subjective, fluid, and often times incorrect definition of harassment is the controlling definition in any situation. My definition, right or wrong, is immaterial.

Precisely. "Offended" is in the eye of the beholder.

I understand the point you're making.

But, to operate as if regular conversation is going to be twisted into a harassment lawsuit and that a workplace is a social landmine because of a very minute number of women who are looking to hurt good men based on their experiences with some bad ones is an overblown reaction.

I still accept an occasional date with someone I've met online, despite the fact that there DOES exist the possibility that I may be murdered. Women DO get murdered by men occasionally. Many more than men get sued for harassment for telling a woman that they like her haircut. Overblown, exaggerated responses to a miniscule threat takes away from the real problem here.

I didn't deserve, at age 16, to have my 28 year old boss remark about my ass or boobs nearly every day at work. I didn't possess the confidence or understanding that his behavior was extremely out of line and didn't want to risk losing my job. Times have gradually changed since then and I think it's a good thing that men and women communicate person-to-person. If a man sees women as an object to be conquered or possessed, they behave accordingly and it's not right. That's the long and short of it. Hopefully, you'd want your 16 year old daughter to know that she doesn't have to put up with that at work. Certainly, if my son had a female coworker accuse him of being offensive for telling her she looks nice, I'd back him 100%.

Should be simple.

I don't think you do [understand the point]. Your analogy about online dating is flawed because you very likely place a higher utility on going on that date than many men do in chit chatting with women in the workplace.

A better analogy is this. Two identical islands.
Choose the place to vacation:

Island A: A place where there is a 2% chance of being blown up by a terrorist.
Island B: A place where there is a 0% chance of being blown up by a terrorist, but one item, that you might not even like, on one menu at one restaurant is just a tiny bit worse.

Should be simple? Yes. The only way to make it simple is to remove all doubt and subjectivity. I don't really care what the chances are. If I can protect my reputation and my family's resources to the best of my ability by keeping my mouth shut and vacationing at Island B, I will.

EDIT to say: As noted before, it's not a male/female thing for me at all. If people named Steve were able to lob any accusation they wanted and totally fuck up my world (even for day), I wouldn't chit chat with Steves.

 

[PDXGrizzly]

I’m impressed eGriz! This has been an informative and often stimulating discussion on a current social topic that has not devolved into a name calling s***show. Besides a few outliers, everyone on both sides of the issue has made excellent points and maintained civility.