|
Aging Millenial posted:How do we fix the fact that women appear to be more sexually responsive to men who are strong, capable, and have high social status? Men who often command other men. It's as if women, by their very existence, fuel toxic masculinity, because men who succeed at that version of masculinity tend to be more sexually successful, which creates a huge incentive for the continuance of toxic masculinity. I am happy to be open about my lack of caring about sports, or my eagerness about reading poetry by the lakeside, but the result of that would often be that most women would consider me a fruit. 
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 08:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 03:23 |
|
|
Aging Millenial posted:How do we fix the fact that women appear to be more sexually responsive to men who are strong, capable, and have high social status? Men who often command other men. It's as if women, by their very existence, fuel toxic masculinity, because men who succeed at that version of masculinity tend to be more sexually successful, which creates a huge incentive for the continuance of toxic masculinity. I am happy to be open about my lack of caring about sports, or my eagerness about reading poetry by the lakeside, but the result of that would often be that most women would consider me a fruit. They should just become lesbians like me and then no men would have sex except with each other and it would be equal. There, I solved sexism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:04
|
|
|
Aging Millenial posted:How do we fix the fact that women appear to be more sexually responsive to men who are strong, capable, and have high social status? Men who often command other men. It's as if women, by their very existence, fuel toxic masculinity, because men who succeed at that version of masculinity tend to be more sexually successful, which creates a huge incentive for the continuance of toxic masculinity. I am happy to be open about my lack of caring about sports, or my eagerness about reading poetry by the lakeside, but the result of that would often be that most women would consider me a fruit. I think the reason women don't like you is because it only took one paragraph for you to come across as a massive tool, not because you prefer poetry to sports. It's true that attractive, friendly, charismatic, successful people tend to do better in all parts of their life (making friends, getting job offers/promotions, being invited to parties) though to some extent, that's a tautology. How do we fix the problem that people are more attracted to attractive people? But it's flawed to put all the blame on women for that and to some extent, it really does boil down to "well, if it's their preference and they don't want to change it, there's not much you can do for them". I would not consider having confidence, charisma, or strength (emotional or physical?) to always be emblematic of toxic masculinity. Which isn't to say there aren't women who are sexist or women who promote toxic masculinity. But that's not inherent to being a woman, just as a father beating his son for crying isn't inherent to being a man.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:07
|
|
|
Aging Millenial posted:How do we fix the fact that women appear to be more sexually responsive to men who are strong, capable, and have high social status? Men who often command other men. It's as if women, by their very existence, fuel toxic masculinity, because men who succeed at that version of masculinity tend to be more sexually successful, which creates a huge incentive for the continuance of toxic masculinity. I am happy to be open about my lack of caring about sports, or my eagerness about reading poetry by the lakeside, but the result of that would often be that most women would consider me a fruit. Tiny Brontosaurus posted:FAU should just close this thread now because it will be an MRA cesspit by the end of the
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:10
|
|
|
"Why don't women pay attention to me?," asks the person who blames the very existence of women for his problems.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:11
|
|
|
Mayhaps as this is the thread to discuss Patriarchy and its effect on men it would be more productive to discuss toxic masculinity how and why it forms and what can be done to combat it, y'know instead of flaming and shitposting in order to make the prophecy of this thread becoming an MRA cesspool come true?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:19
|
|
|
Tarantula posted:Mayhaps as this is the thread to discuss Patriarchy and its effect on men it would be more productive to discuss toxic masculinity how and why it forms and what can be done to combat it, y'know instead of flaming and shitposting in order to make the prophecy of this thread becoming an MRA cesspool come true? Yes, the women posting about how the man civilly discussing how women are at fault for the creation of toxic masculinity is the grossest goddamn thing are the ones at fault.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:20
|
|
|
stone cold posted:Yes, the women posting about how the man civilly discussing how women are at fault for the creation of toxic masculinity is the grossest goddamn thing are the ones at fault. I was actually hoping people could just ignore the obvious troll and move to being productive but I guess this thread is just going to be gassed so be it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:25
|
|
|
Tarantula posted:Mayhaps as this is the thread to discuss Patriarchy and its effect on men it would be more productive to discuss toxic masculinity how and why it forms and what can be done to combat it, y'know instead of flaming and shitposting in order to make the prophecy of this thread becoming an MRA cesspool come true? Yo I didn't post the "why won't girls suck my dick even though I'm unbearable to be around" post. Thread's turning MRA just fine all by itself. And I have been talking quite a bit about toxic masculinity. Toxic masculinity is refusing to read something before criticizing that thing, and insisting that a woman speaking plainly is incomprehensible because you don't like what she's saying, and placing the blame for your misbehavior on women not managing you well enough, and all the other stuff that's shining with that bright neon toxic glow right there for anyone to see if they can man up and face it. Tarantula posted:I was actually hoping people could just ignore the obvious troll and move to being productive but I guess this thread is just going to be gassed so be it. I'm the author of half the OP you cool rad guy. I'm not a troll just because you don't like what I have to say. Tiny Brontosaurus fucked around with this message at 09:37 on Dec 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:25
|
|
|
Since the discussion of house work seems to be a focal point (poetry man excluded), I want to add my own thoughts. I want to stress that I'm talking about it in a general sense, not merely about the specific example of the guy who leaves a glass by the sink. I'm also deliberately painting sharp dividing lines here, when in reality the lines are becoming increasingly blurred, to simplify the argument. People have already argued that women have a different standard of cleanliness inculcated from childhood, compared to men, psychologically conditioning them to react with annoyance/disgust at a certain level of dirtiness and then to do something about it. The flip side of that though, is that men aren't. Not just the "do something about it" part, the threshold for when a man thinks things are getting too dirty and disgusting could be significantly higher, and this likely extends into actually perceiving the dirtiness below that standard. That "dirt blindness" makes it much harder for the man to "instinctively" preempt a woman's annoyance at things being too dirty, even if he wants to because he cares about her, which means he has to put in much more conscious effort to realize things need cleaning - on top of the effort required to actually do the cleaning. This is not an argument in favor of just throwing your hands in the air and giving up on getting men to clean their poo poo, it's simply to recognize that men are expected to live up to the standards that they've not actually been prepared for at any point in their lives. Like, their standards might literally never have been developed beyond where they were when they were 10, so they have a lot of catching up to do while juggling other adult responsibilities. That doesn't mean men shouldn't learn that poo poo, but it does mean that women probably shouldn't expect men to just innately understand their standards. That is probably why people are arguing for sitting down and finding some standard of cleanliness that's acceptable to both/all parties, and defining how much work is required to maintain that, and who should do what. Not because the man doesn't care about the woman, but because doing the work even when he would usually not even consider it to be in need of doing is a way to make the association between a certain level of dirtiness and needing to do house work. Eventually this then becomes routine, and the man might even come to adopt an attitude to when house work needs to get done that is much more in line with his partner, making him better able to anticipate when doing some house work would really brighten her day. Obviously this still requires that the man is actually willing to accommodate her wishes, but that's why sitting down and having a real discussion about the why, how, when and who of house work is important, since it makes the man an active equal participant rather than the assistant to his partner. It does however also mean that the wife might have to lower her expectations a bit, which is essentially the flip side to him upping his game on the home work front. And of course some men might really just want a mom-wife, in which case nothing is to be done other than living with it or leaving him. A Buttery Pastry fucked around with this message at 09:34 on Dec 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:32
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Yo I didn't post the "why won't girls suck my dick even though I'm unbearable to be around" post. Thread's turning MRA just fine all by itself. And I have been talking quite a bit about toxic masculinity. Toxic masculinity is refusing to read something before criticizing that thing, and insisting that a woman speaking plainly is incomprehensible because you don't like what she's saying, and placing the blame for your misbehavior on women not managing you well enough, and all the other stuff that's shining with that bright neon toxic glow right there for anyone to see if they can man up and face it. I apologize for not coming across succinctly enough, in no way did I mean to say you were the troll, I've rather liked reading many of your posts and found them informative but I suppose this is enough out of me then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:33
|
|
|
Tarantula posted:I apologize for not coming across succinctly enough, in no way did I mean to say you were the troll, I've rather liked reading many of your posts and found them informative but I suppose this is enough out of me then. Oh all right then v  v
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:35
|
|
|
Aging Millenial posted:How do we fix the fact that women appear to be more sexually responsive to men who are strong, capable, and have high social status? Men who often command other men. It's as if women, by their very existence, fuel toxic masculinity, because men who succeed at that version of masculinity tend to be more sexually successful, which creates a huge incentive for the continuance of toxic masculinity. I am happy to be open about my lack of caring about sports, or my eagerness about reading poetry by the lakeside, but the result of that would often be that most women would consider me a fruit. I'm open about liking anime of all loving things and I'm doing just fine. I mean, I agree that it's trivial to recognize that sexual charisma derives in part from extremely gendered performance standards, but there's plenty of women who fantasize about a sensitive man who reads poems by the lake you dummy! As a side note, I was the most socially intolerable, disliked, and suicidal person ever until I was finally convinced to not express my emotions -- doing quite fabulously now! Not sure where this fits in but there's certainly limits to expressing your frustrations after all. edit: About the other topic, my girlfriend does almost all the housework except tall/strong/gross stuff and I try to recompense her in other ways. The "King Solomon" solution of cutting the baby in half is never really the best option imho. Luxury Communism fucked around with this message at 09:39 on Dec 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:36
|
|
|
Luxury Communism posted:I'm open about liking anime of all loving things and I'm doing just fine. I mean, I agree that it's trivial to recognize that sexual charisma derives in part from extremely gendered performance standards, but there's plenty of women who fantasize about a sensitive man who reads poems by the lake you dummy! Who did the convincing? Did it feel like there was a gendered aspect to it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:38
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Who did the convincing? Did it feel like there was a gendered aspect to it? I'm sure there was, but I'm not too keen to look a gift horse in the mouth when I am universally more liked this way and feel more fulfilled in having control over myself.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:42
|
|
|
Luxury Communism posted:I'm sure there was, but I'm not too keen to look a gift horse in the mouth when I am universally more liked this way and feel more fulfilled in having control over myself. Whatever works!
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:44
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Oh all right then v FFS he wasn't calling you a troll he was talking about the loving visible-from-loving-space MRA poo poo and run troll.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:46
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:FFS he wasn't calling you a troll he was talking about the loving visible-from-loving-space MRA poo poo and run troll. Yes, it may surprise you to know that I did in fact read the post I quoted. Did you read the post you quoted?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:48
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Yes, it may surprise you to know that I did in fact read the post I quoted. Did you read the post you quoted? It may surprise you to learn that when you act like a sarcastic hateful rear end in a top hat in 99% of your posts the 1% when you are being sincere sometimes slip through the cracks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:50
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:It may surprise you to learn that when you act like a sarcastic hateful rear end in a top hat in 99% of your posts the 1% when you are being sincere sometimes slip through the cracks. I'm only a hateful rear end in a top hat to the assholes I hate, and I only hate assholes for being bigots. You're on my ignore list apparently so hoo boy you musta been a bad one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:52
|
|
|
I merely raised the fact that men who out-compete other men on masculine terms -- in resource acquisition, in male status games, even in physical capability, etc, tend to get more rewarded by women on sexual terms, because these men's very success on masculine-competition terms appears to trigger female attraction. So on the one hand you have feminists crowing about "toxic masculinity" and on the other you have the reality that men who succeed at the culture of toxic masculinity get to be rewarded sexually. Men should apparently play down their eagerness to be the boss and top dog, but then the boss and top dog tends to more likely get laid, and with more desirable partners as well. Surely this reward system is going to encourage more toxic masculinity. How do you fix this? Perhaps it can't be fixed, which feminists don't want to hear, or perhaps the solution is for more women to give priority to the dweebs and neckbeards when they're selecting their male sexual partners as a way to create a viable reward for avoiding the culture of "toxic masculinity," certainly a ridiculous suggestion that feminists don't want to hear as well. So, I suppose, the solution is just to accept the reality that there are real and substantial payoffs to participating in the culture of what feminists have labeled "toxic masculinity." Also perhaps when feminists are faced with this obstacle I suppose they'll just redefine what the vague term "toxic masculinity" is suppose to impugn, which will just be really bad things like rape and sexism. Yea I agree men shouldn't really engage in those things as they are bad things and we should all be considerate towards each other and respectful of each other's rights. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:58
|
|
|
Oh hey Jarmak your friend is back.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 09:58
|
|
|
Aging Millenial posted:I merely raised the fact that men who out-compete other men on masculine terms -- in resource acquisition, in male status games, even in physical capability, etc, tend to get more rewarded by women on sexual terms, because these men's very success on masculine-competition terms appears to trigger female attraction. So on the one hand you have feminists crowing about "toxic masculinity" and on the other you have the reality that men who succeed at the culture of toxic masculinity get to be rewarded sexually. Men should apparently play down their eagerness to be the boss and top dog, but then the boss and top dog tends to more likely get laid, and with more desirable partners as well. Surely this reward system is going to encourage more toxic masculinity. How do you fix this? Please tell me more  you're really forcing me to get wet for neckbeards 
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 10:00
|
|
|
stone cold posted:Please tell me more While theories about biological determinism can be abused, to dismiss the very idea that there are behavioral and psychological differences between the sexes with a smile is laughable and sad. What is needed is nuance. We can object to the misuse of biological determinism to pigeonhole people and tell them what their life course should be, but we can also use it to create understanding between the sexes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 10:08
|
|
|
Aging Millenial posted:I merely raised the fact that men who out-compete other men on masculine terms -- in resource acquisition, in male status games, even in physical capability, etc, tend to get more rewarded by women on sexual terms, because these men's very success on masculine-competition terms appears to trigger female attraction. So on the one hand you have feminists crowing about "toxic masculinity" and on the other you have the reality that men who succeed at the culture of toxic masculinity get to be rewarded sexually. Men should apparently play down their eagerness to be the boss and top dog, but then the boss and top dog tends to more likely get laid, and with more desirable partners as well. Surely this reward system is going to encourage more toxic masculinity. How do you fix this? You're operating on some very confused ideas and frankly, should talk to a therapist about it. Yes, if the only people you seek approval from are "women who are sexist", then "following society's expectations for sufficiently masculine behavior" would be a viable strategy, in the same way that if you seek approval from white supremacists, then "being a racist" would help you in that goal. Have you considered... not looking for scraps of attention from assholes? Even if you get it, it won't make you happy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 10:10
|
|
|
I know D&D is the easiest to troll but holy poo poo
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 10:12
|
|
|
I speculate that SA moderators are in fact, inherently sexually attracted to many aspects of toxic shitposting trolls and submit to you that as the reason why their posts dominate the SA forums. They are simply out-competing the basic beta-posters on all fonts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 10:21
|
|
|
Colin Mockery posted:You're operating on some very confused ideas and frankly, should talk to a therapist about it. Most women are not versed in 3rd wave feminist discourse. Most women are not college graduates and have traditionalist attitudes about gender roles. And quite frankly, the things I'm saying also apply to most of the educated feminists who consider themselves woke. And there's also the matter of women's expectations of gender roles with their life partners. Women relentlessly select their mates based on demonstrated or potential ability be the sort of male who materially out-competes other males, which just goes to fuel toxic masculinity as it gives men the mentality of "be top dog = get pussy." This is how this thread is going: Feminists of D&D: Let's talk about the impacts of patriarchy/misogyny/male privelege on men. Me: Okay let's talk about this. This is what I think. Feminists of D&D: Saying anything that goes counter to our premises is a troll. Clearly the people who are eager about this thread are not interested in a real talk and are merely interested in lecturing males in order to get a dopamine boost out of the momentary superiority inherent in the the lecturer-listener dynamic. I'm out peeps. Aging Millenial fucked around with this message at 10:28 on Dec 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 10:23
|
|
|
dupe
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 10:27
|
|
|
Aging Millenial posted:Feminists of D&D: Let's talk about the impacts of patriarchy/misogyny/male privelege on men. Gosh, if only I had rewarded this dude with sexual attention, this tragic end could have been avoided.  Alas, he's just another hapless man that women have driven into misogyny... poor lil guy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 10:32
|
|
|
Western feminism is a bourgeois ideology and shouldn't be considered seriously over other opportunities to end inequality between the sexes
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 10:47
|
|
|
Such as?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 12:01
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:I wanna make this clear. Here is my suggestion for how to deal with inequitable division of household chores: When two people start cohabitating, they should sit down and decide how to divide up the chores in a way that they both think is fair. That should happen at the start of the cohabitation. If they cannot come up with an agreement that is satisfactory to them both, them they probably shouldn't cohabitate. This was a while back, but one of the literal problems with this approach, as articulated by those articles, is that the perception of what is fair is vastly different between the man and the woman in the cohabiting situation. Men overestimate a lot the amount of work they do, or the difficulty of the work they do, so when asked to come up with what is "fair", will inevitably decide to do less work, but do work that they value as more important, and this is "fair". It's not. Personally I hate housework but recognize it's a necessary evil and I one day would love to live in an automated house where that poo poo gets taken care of by robots or whatever the gently caress. I've already got a roomba, which is probably the greatest invention since the washing machine. The washing machine is another interesting case since that probably had more literal impact on people's lives than most other inventions in the past few centuries. Not having to do very labour intensive work washing clothes, that would often take up an entire day, or even longer, was a huge boon to people's lives.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 12:04
|
|
|
Tarantula posted:I was actually hoping people could just ignore the obvious troll and move to being productive but I guess this thread is just going to be gassed so be it. I have a feeling that that would be the majorities' goal, as progressive as this thread would be. It's easier to remain arrogant to change than to reflect upon insight, like the few posters nit-picking at each other because they'd rather abandon coherent discussion in lieu of not shutting it down because either party is unwilling to adjust their perspective. A Buttery Pastry posted:This is not an argument in favor of just throwing your hands in the air and giving up on getting men to clean their poo poo, it's simply to recognize that men are expected to live up to the standards that they've not actually been prepared for at any point in their lives. I agree. This is why male genital mutilation is proclaimed a sanitation issue. Dead Cosmonaut posted:Western feminism is a bourgeois ideology and shouldn't be considered seriously over other opportunities to end inequality between the sexes What other opportunities? Name one. Guy Goodbody posted:This is why I suggested that both the man and the woman work together to come up with a division of labor that both can agree with. Guy Goodbody posted:I wanna make this clear. Here is my suggestion for how to deal with inequitable division of household chores: When two people start cohabitating, they should sit down and decide how to divide up the chores in a way that they both think is fair. That should happen at the start of the cohabitation. If they cannot come up with an agreement that is satisfactory to them both, them they probably shouldn't cohabitate. Guy Goodbody posted:You know what would also solve this problem? Both of the people talking about chores and comping up with an equitable division of labor when they first loving move in together. This all sounds really great on paper, but between a woman and a man suffering from toxic masculinity a discussion on the division of labor would be anything but civil.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 12:34
|
|
|
This is what happens when I sleep.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 12:41
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:I wanna make this clear. Here is my suggestion for how to deal with inequitable division of household chores: When two people start cohabitating, they should sit down and decide how to divide up the chores in a way that they both think is fair. That should happen at the start of the cohabitation. If they cannot come up with an agreement that is satisfactory to them both, them they probably shouldn't cohabitate. Relationships are work. Even between two people who love and respect each other - and the point I'm making relies on the assumption that we're talking about a healthy relationship, because if not then there are way more fundamental issues to address before you even get to the housework stuff. But even healthy, happy relationships have problems. The housework thing isn't a universal law. It's just a common issue in otherwise totally fine relationships. It has been in mine, and I've been with the same partner for years. Why? Because I hadn't been shouldered with the housework for my entire family for years. I just didn't recognize how much there was to do or what needed to be taken care of. When I lived alone, poo poo just didn't get done. This doesn't make me, or any of the tons and tons of men in my same position, a bad person/partner/etc. It's just a thing that has to be worked on. You don't go into a relationship with everything being perfect and smooth from the start. You might not even know there are problems. But tons of couples fail when they start living together, and housework can be a major part of the problem, up there with money. This is just a situation where, most of the time, it's men who have to put in more effort to catch up to their partners. That's all. Yes, it can be overwhelming. You might feel like you don't know how to do the work properly, or like your partner will be disappointed, or there's too much to do, or whatever. You just try to get better at it. Part of that means recognizing just how much extra work women are doing on a daily basis in the form of household chores.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 12:56
|
|
|
Rush Limbo posted:This was a while back, but one of the literal problems with this approach, as articulated by those articles, is that the perception of what is fair is vastly different between the man and the woman in the cohabiting situation. Men overestimate a lot the amount of work they do, or the difficulty of the work they do, so when asked to come up with what is "fair", will inevitably decide to do less work, but do work that they value as more important, and this is "fair". It's not. I'd like to think this whole topic is a case of people talking past one another. Better communication isn't a magic bullet, but incidents of bad or dishonest communication are no reason to just shrug and blame some formless spectre of toxic masculinity. Giving "gutter-cleaning" and "weekly vacuuming" equal weighting is stupid in its own right; "Let's split housework equally" "Yeah sounds good" is a non-conversation that resolves nothing - of course the arrangement went sour, it didn't exist in the first place!
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 13:31
|
|
|
Aging Millenial posted:I merely raised the fact that men who out-compete other men on masculine terms -- in resource acquisition, in male status games, even in physical capability, etc, tend to get more rewarded by women on sexual terms, because these men's very success on masculine-competition terms appears to trigger female attraction. So on the one hand you have feminists crowing about "toxic masculinity" and on the other you have the reality that men who succeed at the culture of toxic masculinity get to be rewarded sexually. Men should apparently play down their eagerness to be the boss and top dog, but then the boss and top dog tends to more likely get laid, and with more desirable partners as well. Surely this reward system is going to encourage more toxic masculinity. How do you fix this? Not all traditional masculinity is by default "toxic masculinity" and your failure to recognize this is what marks you as a troll or an idiot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:I'd like to think this whole topic is a case of people talking past one another. Better communication isn't a magic bullet, but incidents of bad or dishonest communication are no reason to just shrug and blame some formless spectre of toxic masculinity. Giving "gutter-cleaning" and "weekly vacuuming" equal weighting is stupid in its own right; "Let's split housework equally" "Yeah sounds good" is a non-conversation that resolves nothing - of course the arrangement went sour, it didn't exist in the first place! And the problem is a tendency for men to assume that gruelling tasks are easier than they seem simply because women seem to do the jobs 'easily' not taking into account that watching someone rolling a boulder up a hill can seem pretty easy when you've got a deckchair, parasol and cocktail. You're right that it doesn't go down where a woman puts a playing card with "VACUUMING" and a man replies by putting down "GUTTERS" and going "Snap!" but there is a tendency to mentally overestimate your contribution and underestimate someone else's, because you saw what you did, but you probably didn't see what they did. It's a cognitive bias, as opposed to a man sniggering as he puts his feet up. Take the now-deleted post a few of us were chortling at a month ago here - the long and short of it was the guy offered to cook Thanksgiving dinner, literally just shoved a ham in the oven and then put his feet up to watch the game because he assumed that's all that needs doing. Like, the dude genuinely felt he'd done all the work necessary. That's not malevolence, although it's complacency on the level of it, but it's an (admittedly extreme) example of how warped the perception of effort can be to the lazier.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 14:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 03:23 |
|
|
Agreed, and a good solution to the warped and stunted male understanding of housework is, at the start of cohabiting, to have a direct and comprehensive conversation about household responsibilities, ideally with some kind of rota or chore list or something that people can point to when they see their partner is shirking.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 15:02
|
|