I quote here a post put in the thread about platonic friendships, since it seems to fit here better.
Quote from David_K on Yesterday at 114957 AM
Peace Rana, all
Good article. Thanks for sharing.
I mostly agree with what the author says in his article. But I don't agree with everything the author says about masculinity. There is a difference between masculine men and macho men. It seems like the author misunderstands what masculinity is. A masculine man is a man that takes responsibility, is a hard worker, is a provider, is able to protect himself (self-defence). A man can stand for equal rights, support women rights and still be masculine. And still have a masculine vibe/energy. You don't need to loose masculinity to support women rights. And It seems that the author believes there are small differences between men and women, which is a myth. There are huge differences between women and men that go beyound socialization. This is reality. And this is a very controversial topic. In the politically correct societies of the west it is almost taboo to talk about the differences between women and men. Because from an early age we learn that women and men are not very different. We learn that our differences is mostly because of socialization. But that's a lie. The truth is that men and women are very different. The brain of women and men are different. And women and men have different abilities. and there are lots of other differences between men and women. It is how our nature is. Men and women are intelligent on the same level. Women are not more intelligent than men. And men are not more intelligent than women. Women have abilities that men lack, and men have abilities that women lack. Masculinity and feminity is biologically programmed in human beings. It is hardwired into us. But it needs to be activated. A balance. Ying and Yang you know
A man can only be happy when he is masculine. And a woman can only be happy when she is feminine. A man can be masculine, and still be emotional. A woman can be feminine and still be strong. A man is happy when he acts like a man. Not when he acts like a woman. Just like a dog only can be happy when it acts like a dog. If a dog plays the role of a cat, it can't be happy. You probably get my point. Many people are brainwashed by feminist propaganda, they believe in the myths of feminism. And many people are brainwashed by the male chauvinistic ideology, they believe in the myths of male chauvinism and patriarchy. Why be a feminist when you can be a HUMAN? Why be a male chauvinist when you can be a HUMAN?
By the way, these days I don't believe in equality anymore. Now I believe in equal rights and equal opportunities instead of equality. How can men and women be equal when they are different? That's illogical. Why can't we celebrate our differences? Why should women look like men and men look like women? Isn't it stupid? However, if any one can convince me why equality is important I will change my mind.
And when it comes to friends. I only have one friend of the opposite sex. Not because don't want more friends from the opposite sex. But because almost no women see me as a friend Almost every women I have been friends with wanted to get to know me on a personal level. Especially the last couple of years. They were attracted to me So whenever a woman says she wants to be my friend, it is hard for me to trust her (because of my past experiences). And many women have hidden intentions (just like many men). They say that they want to be your friend but they have other plans for you. Lol. Talk is cheap. So I would rather hang out with my male friends. Haha And NO, we don't talk about things most guys talk about. We don't talk about sports, cars etc. But I think basketball is a good sport. And it can be fun too
I could not disagree more with this. Starting from the starting point of putting things on its head by assuming that the core question is that of equality and not of justice. Precisely it is the assertion of equality as the principal contention that leads to injustice downstream if people are unequal one must treat them unequally. So I reject comletely that anyone, and least of all feminists, have ever cared principally about equality. It is clear that women and men are not equal. The reproducion burden obviously is completely and overwhelmely unequal. But it is the contention of many antifeminists that what feminists seek is equality. Obviously core feminism along history has never pretended such a thing, because then there would only be one sex. But antifeminists choose and persist in saying that that is what feminists seek. No. Justice, justice, justice.
Then the other trick of this kind of dicourse derived from the first is to make out of the difference between females and males a sort of elastic material where you can establish between women and men any characteristic that may come to mind as difference between men and women, and stretch the thing to discretion, saying that the differences between males ar female go way beyond biological differences to comprise psychological differences and unquatifiable, but usable factors that nobody can certify. We are back to square one and, for instance, women only have that emotional disponibility and disposition that makes them unique to do the washing, clean babies shit, vacuum the carpet and so on. Biological differences need no arguing and nobody argues abut them. The rest is litterature, and not very good at that. And I am baffled that anybdy should look for "extras" as far as differences are concerned, when in fact biological differences already entail plenty, plenty plenty, and certainly it is squeezed to the utmost to extract dividends.
There is another point. Since those "masculine" (meaning characteristics "real" men have) and "feminine" (meaning characteristics "real" women have) are so clear, any man or woman who deviates from such clear conception as what is manly and what is womanly, gets stamped as "feminist" or virago and the equivalent for sissy menor whatever they get, and those are manufactured into a personal intimate and untractable problem fofor those people, when in fact it is a mental construct of those who refuse to acknowledge that psychology is personal, individual and not sexual, or racial or collective in any way. It is this absolutely arbitrary conception that has made life a hell for many men and women who happen to not be what is stipulated as manly or womanly, and in this specific aspect, I think that it is "feminine" men who are more repressed and punished. Woman have it bad, but I think may be not as bad. And then some people disparage about homosexuality and that kind of thing when in fact they make it impossible for certain men to be themselves. If that is not cornering and cruelty, I do not know what it is.
In fact I would laugh at this whole thing if it wasn't so painful and tragic for so many poersons who are penalized all their lifes for being "different". And that is on the extreme of it. Without going to the extrems, many people are forced to assume attitudes and manners which they wouldn't if they were not socialised on that, and socialisation is not mere sloganising, but myriad of reactions, actions attitudes which we are not even conscious of and which point the way unequivocally everywhere and under every circumstance for everybody. No matter what anybody does, at this stage it is simply not possible to delimit or disengage what is innate and what is socialisation. To pretend that that can be done is a chimera, a fraud and a trick.
Also when you start from saying that some things are manly and others are womanly, you are bludgeoning freedom of choice as you say, because who is the man or woman who wants to be branded unmanly or unwomanly? The fact is that there have been millions of men and woman to whom that has been done. A medal, a gold medal to human bigotry and cruelty, enormous cruelty, should be handed to societies for that.
"Femine" and "masculine" are abstract qualities and, as Ibn Arabi and other monuments of thought and spirituality have said, both qualities exist in men and women. They are necessary for men and women. The balance of those qualitie is what makes al insan al kamil.
Lastly and most vigorously the Qur'an nowhere condones such vision. It rejects it. No moral or psychological quality is branded as manly or womanly anywhere. The opposite.
Point to a single line in the whole of Qur'an that points to differences between man a woman other than reproductive function. And at that, the Qur'an does not even impose suckling on the woman...
What is important, is not to seek for additional differences between men and women, but to strengthen the sense of mutual and general responsibility of both. Men do not have any reproductive charge, therefore it is obvious, not because of any psychological specific disposition, but because of plain moral decency that they must assume other charges if they do not want to be reproductive pimps who live off women. And in fact there are men who do that, live off women to whatever extent and do not balance any of women's burden. That is not because of any manly disposition, but because of moral wickedness, they are morally pimps, and therefore unworthy men, and there is nothing psychological in that, but moral.
Salaam
