Changing the Notion of Masculinity

[seabeyond]

Yet a different effort to transform masculinities has started among civil society groups that have a goal that may be even more ambitious than physically transforming gender: They want to change how people think about “being a man” to break the connection between masculinity and violence that is the root cause of high rates of gender violence in the region. The new direction is prompted by a realization that after years of trying to help the mostly female and child victims of domestic and gender violence, the situation is not improving. The logic is straightforward: prevention.

“To stop violence, you need to prevent it from happening,” said Somsouk Sananikone, a civil society activist from Laos, speaking after a recent training workshop in Bangkok, where he was one of about 30 civil society participants from eight Asian and Pacific nations, including Indonesia, Fiji and Mongolia. The event was organized by Partners for Prevention, a U.N. interagency program aimed at ending gender-based violence.

*

One country survey is from Bangladesh, where 52 percent of men said they had been physically violent against a partner, compared with the previous W.H.O. survey, which reported that 40 percent to 42 percent of women said they had been the victims of violence by their partner, Partners for Prevention said in a statement in August. In the surveys, men tended to admit to a high rate of committing crimes like rape. In Cambodia, about one in five men said they had committed a rape. Of those men, about half, or 11 percent of the male population over all, said the rape had occurred within the last year.

*

Sexual entitlement is the No.1 reason given by men in the region for committing rape, Partners for Prevention said. By comparison, alcohol, long considered a key driver of sexual violence, plays less of a role than previously thought. In Bangladesh, “entitlement” was also one of the most-cited motives, with 77 percent to 81 percent of the respondents — depending on whether they were from urban or rural areas — saying it was a factor. The “fun” factor was higher among rural men at 66 percent, and the “anger” or “punishment” factor was lower than China’s, at around 34 percent on average.


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/26/world/asia/changing-the-notion-of-masculinity.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&

[DetlefK]

1. From hunter/gatherer to provider to ???

Times change.
Challenges change.
We define us by means of our environment, so the notion of what being a man means right now depends on what a man usually does right now.

In the Stone-Age, men were the hunters.
What is a hunter? Strong and fast.
What does being a man mean? Being strong and fast.

In agricultural societies (e.g. the ancient kingdoms and nations), men and women occupied the same jobs.
They were more or less equal.

Then came the ages of mass-production, first as craftsmen, then in the manufactures, then in factories.
Men and women occupied different jobs again, so the notions of gender polarized again.
Man turned from a provider of food into a provider of money.

Now we have a technological age. Economic and social well-being doesn't depend on your amount of muscles anymore.
Men and women again occupy the same jobs.
But we still look for an answer, what to do with our lives.



I think, I have solution for this dilemma.
What does survival depend on in today's world?
Your wits, your intelligence, your education.
So, what is a man supposed to provide in a society or family? Knowledge and intelligence.

If we shift the focus away from the body-centered aspect (being able to lift a pig or a sack of grains) to the mind-centered aspect (knowing how to butcher that pig, how to bake bread from these grains, how to build and how to maintain) than we automatically remove the notion of violence and the notion that men and women are fundamentally different.

[redqueen]

2. Yes...

Valuing intellect over strength/physical prowess is key. We aren't there yet, but the shift has started.

[seabeyond]

9. what was the reason for pink? picking berries? i cant remember. nt

[seabeyond]

3. just a note. on the hunter/gathering, we have created a bit of non truth. there were cultures

where the hunter was the women, or both genders hunted. wasnt always all about the man being the hunter. so that little quirk in society isnt necessarily factual.

[Dash87]

4. Wimmenz picked berries and flowers. That's why they evolved

to like them! - some hack somewhere, I'm sure.

In all seriousness, humans were also major scavengers. You didn't really need to have strength to get food. What mattered were scouting skills and intelligence, which anyone could have.

[redqueen]

5. That's why pink IS a girl color! It's SCIENCE!

Seriously, someone who considers themselves a scientific thinker actually proposed that theory!

Hilarious!

[seabeyond]

7. in the other thread last night,

i was going ot post how much i appreciate your posts and insights. did i? i was real tired. but, i really appreciate it dash.

and a

[Dash87]

8. Yay! thx

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

11. I read...

...your "About".

I quote Samuel Butler: "Even the potato, rotting in its dank cellar, has a certain low cunning."
Never underestimate a potato. Many an Irishman would've died for the lack thereof.

[ismnotwasm]

6. Women were the gathers and hearth keepers

And probably occasionally hunters as well. Hunting was not always reliable, and certainly often deadly, leaving families unguarded for uncertain lengths of time. Food was supplemented by grain forage and whatnot. Tight family groups were better for survival and had to have developed some means of defending themselves.

That being said, I like your conclusion.

[niyad]

10. k and r

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

12. When I clicked on this thread...

...and breezed past the in-post headline, my mind had seen the word "Nation" where was written "Notion".
If only the task was as small as I had first misread.

[seabeyond]

13. ha ha ha ha. i see what you are saying.

funny how that works, huh. interesting.