Do men still count?

Hi all. This is not an alpha male thread or anti-female/children. I simply want to find out if others feel the same as I do. Although I do not agree and or necessarily support the views of Feminists, I welcome them into the thread to put forth their views on this subject.

Within the last five years or so, I have noticed a gradual decline in the respect news media outlets place on male adult lives. As of late, whenever any civilians casualties are mentioned, more often than not they are ALWAYS further described as "women and children." Or even worse "mostly women and children," or "at least x% of which were women and children."

Why do I have a problem with this kind of language? Well the implication that I get from phrases such as these is that the lives of adult males do not compare in significance or proportion to those of women and children. What about female soldiers and militants? Or mothers who are out at work while fathers are at home with children? Since women and children are so closely linked together, what's left (adult males) do not seem to matter as much.

I understand people will reply with "but men are generally more likely to be the aggressors and independent" but how would women feel if the reports said "mainly men and children civilians"? It does not matter if it is assumed that soldiers are adult males. The use of these words by the media is an ugly, derogatory reflection on how they view the value of male adult lives.

Some questions you may wish to ponder:

1. Does the media place more importance on the lives of females and children as compared to adult males?
2. Are women always the victims of the actions of adult males?
3. Why are the words "women and children" so closely correlated in so many media releases when describing "civilians"?

Well, a lot of societies have indeed placed more value on women and children. If you kill all your children you can't have any more adults. And women are more useful than men when it comes to reproduction. 1 man can impregnate as many women as he wants. But it doesn't work in reverse. Therefore men are less valuable in that sense.

I dont really think you should take much notice of how the media puts things. Its a proven fact that they shake things up to emphasize a point, it could be people sympathise more with the loss of women and children, i suppose your just suppose to "take it on the chin"
A counter argument would be to ask why women are being portrayed as weak adults who cant keep out of terrors way?
All i'm saying is that there are much bigger problems out there.

i find there is more sexism towards men as well, i used to hate my old job if there was a menial or heavy lifting job they would alwys say leave it to the men but from my experience some men are not as strong as some women and vise versa as some men are better parents than some women its not your sex its the individual person.

but then there are still cases of sexism towards women like the women cant drive thing.

See it once used to be, Men discriminated against Women, for a long time Men treated Women badly.
Then, eventually, this evened out, and it became equal.
Now, it has gone to the other extreme, where Women discriminate against Men.
Who's fault is this?I don't think its anyone's fault, its just how it is.

Originally posted by ExamineAllViews

Some questions you may wish to ponder:

1. Does the media place more importance on the lives of females and children as compared to adult males?
2. Are women always the victims of the actions of adult males?
3. Why are the words "women and children" so closely correlated in so many media releases when describing "civilians"?

1) I actually see this as more of a return to a pre-radical-feminism stance, in that it implies women should be protected more than men.

The phrase "women and children" has been a way to raise righteous indignation for decades if not centuries – if there has been a shift over the last five years, I would guess that it's a correction of a shift during the late 80s and the 90s away from differentiating men vs women.

So my answer is a tentative "yes" – at least the media uses women's deaths in a different way than it uses men's deaths. But it's not a recent phenomenon, and certainly not a result of the feminist movement.

2. No.

3. I think it has to do with raising protective instincts – the media uses "children's" deaths to raise everyone's protective instincts, and "women's" to raise men's protective instincts. It is also possible that there is some residual feeling that male civilians (those of fighting age) should be fighting for their country; that male civilians are by definition either weak or cowardly and therefore their lives are worth less than the lives of women and children who are ensuring the continuity of the society. (please note this is not how I feel about civilian men in any situation)

[edit on 2/5/09 by americandingbat]

Originally posted by ExamineAllViews
Some questions you may wish to ponder:
1. Does the media place more importance on the lives of females and children as compared to adult males?

2. Are women always the victims of the actions of adult males?

3. Why are the words "women and children" so closely correlated in so many media releases when describing "civilians"?

1. Certainly yes they do, they speak of males as being almost sub-human like we don't matter. Not to mention in advertisements the male is always shown as the idiotic one, or the alcoholic one, or the abusive one.

2. Not always no, I think that women can do a LOT of things to males and get away with it.

3. No one cares about adult males?

reply to post by Anonymous ATS


I don't think I take what the media says too literally. It's just that people seem more ok everyday with disregarding the value of adult male lives. I will not take this on the chin because I think this is a very dangerous line of thinking that could be stronger in the future.

reply to post by ExamineAllViews

Oh yes, men still count. They do multiplication and long division, too.

Generally, we men pride ourselves on being able to take care of ourselves. It would be a bit embarrassing, wouldn't it, having people think we wanted to be mollycoddled and fussed over all the time?

A bit girly, that sort of thing.