Reply to Parents of boys who became incels

Forum Index » General Parenting Discussion

Reply to "Parents of boys who became incels"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It's a problem that the entire discussion in this thread is premised on an assumption that boys are almost inherently at risk of going off the rails and becoming bad.  That assumption, which unfortunately has becoming deeply rooted in culture and especially in schools due to liberal political preferences, is the key driver for the problem you are worried about.  Right now, girls are boosted and treated like the future at every turn, even in implausible situations.  Look at the Super Bowl ads for one example, where, among other things, there was an ad where a minority female implausibly bested the entire men's football team (who were portrayed as hateful ogres throughout).  Until you all learn to respect and value boys, expect bad results.  Toxic femininity is real and a problem.[/quote]

Have you ever met a kid? Boys are (usually) confident to the point they need to learn humility, compassion and empathy. They need to be taught a lot emotional skills in order to not end up undateable in todays modern world where women will chose to stay single rather than marry them. That’s why we’re ending up with these incels.

Girls, on the other hand, (usually) develop the emotional skills early, independently and successfully. Where they need guidance is building skills like dealing with conflict and risk taking. Skills boys seems to develop more naturally.

That’s not toxic femininity. That’s basic child development. [/quote]

I have boys, and their confidence that they outwardly project is just bravado. They are deeply insecure, as are their friends. I don’t think tearing down girls is the answer. But, I do see tons of initiatives at least at the elementary level to empower girls and none to empower boys. Even our school gym has a big sign saying “girls rule!” with pictures of professional female athletes. Which is awesome. But they have nothing for boys that is similar. They have a girls coding club and a girls on the run club. Boys aren’t allowed to join either club unless they identify as nonbinary. Even my son’s Boy Scout troop has girls in it. I may get flamed but boys need spaces where they’re safe to be boys, with only other boys, and feel empowered and have strong same gender role models. Just like girls do. As it is right now it seems like girls are allowed into any space that was previously just for boys, but boys are not allowed into any of the spaces just for girls. Until we start celebrating boys for who they are and what amazing things boys can do, they’ll continue to flounder without a strong sense of identity, and that’s where the Joe Rogan types snatch them up and give them an identity- a terrible one. We need to catch them earlier and give them a better one, but as a society, the general message is “boys are bad”. [/quote]

I get that, but... do you not feel that the whole world constantly celebrates men and their achievements? Don't boys see empowerment and role models every time they turn on the TV/ pass a billboard/ watch the news? The Williams and the Rapinoes and the Collins are [i]exceptions[/i]. We only know them because they're so exceptional. The world is awash with men being celebrated, such that when a woman finally reaches the top, she's an abberation to be pointed out. [/quote]

To a 7yo? No I don't think it feels like the whole world "constantly celebrates men." You are thinking of history, statistics, CEOs etc - that's not really what younger kids are necessarily awash in, unless they are spending a lot of time watching TV or devices.[/quote]

But why do you think JK Rowling made her main character a boy?  Because then the books would appeal to both boys and girls.  If the main character was a girl the story could be exactly the same but only girls would read it.

Boys get plenty of passive reinforcement that they are the default sex.[/quote]
Related to your book comment - there has been a large “outcry” recently from men that there are too many books from/about women. They actively refuse to read books with women as the main character. Girls and women grow up reading books with male protagonists basically from birth, but you want a boy to read something about a girl? Outrage!
I hadn’t even thought of this until your comment, thank you for adding it.[/quote]

I believe the prevailing trend in schools is to largely disallow or discourage books authored by cisgender white males.[/quote]

Is it to remove books by cis white men? Or to add more books by others? Are they removing Shel Silverstein and Maurice Sendak and Mo Willems? [/quote]

I think it’s an extension of the educational effort to center other voices, and to create space or highlight authors of color, womyn authors, and LGTBQIA+ literary works.[/quote]

Right. But is that exclusionary to white cis men? Or simply a balancing of the voices available? It feels like men are mad at no longer being the default voice in every space, or at the [i]potential [/i]for having to compete on a bigger field. And there's this refusal to recognize that not being given automatic preference is not the same as being excluded.

I read a fair amount of science fiction, historically utterly dominated by men, and when women authors started getting the big awards, some men lost. their. minds. It was no longer a boys-only space. They had to compete with some amazing authors who might never have entered the space 50 years ago, or gotten an agent/ publisher if they had tried. "Because no one will buy sci fi by women. Sorry, it's just the market." And men just couldn't handle the increased competition. They wanted to keep the "no girls allowed" sign on the clubhouse door. [/quote]

Your theories sound good and appear reasonable.  But that’s not the reality of what’s happening in the example of the schoolbook-list , linked above.

The school did not simply “balance” reading by adding a few BIPOC/womyn/LGTBQIA+ authored or themes.

No.  They virtually excluded all cisgender white male themes and most authors.  It took quite some digging to locate the list discussed in the dcum link, but this appears to be the list on page 3; see for yourself:

https://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Cooper-English-7-AAP-2023.pdf

[/quote]
Uh is this satire? Like half of these are from white men. Did you even look at the list? [/quote]

Yes - did YOU look at it?  Virtually every classic (other than To Kill A Mockingbird) has been purged.  Look at the themes of nearly all the books.

You seriously notice no pattern, imbalance, or bias?   [/quote]
Gosh, cis white men are so delulu, you gotta read the articles you are posting. These straws you’re grasping at are not doing you any favours.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics