How different would things be if the gender roles of today existed since the beginning?

[Tanj]

I don't know much about evolution, but what I do know is that environment and not just environment but behavior and actions play a role in how a species evolves correct?

All evolution cares about is successful reproduction. If the traits you are describing lead to more children, and those children having children, then it plays a role. If not (and I am grossly simplifying here), forgeddaboudit.

I mean certainly this will impact us in a way we may not necessarily want.

Who is "we" and by what criteria are we judging whether we want it or not?

 

[DogmaHunter]

I don't know much about evolution, but what I do know is that environment and not just environment but behavior and actions play a role in how a species evolves correct? If this is true why wouldn't women and men 200,000 years from now be different than they are today because women are doing more manly things and men are doing more girly things. I mean certainly this will impact us in a way we may not necessarily want.

I don't entirely agree, but I'll run with it.
In that respect, it doesn't really matter. It's not like we men are still responsible for going on hunts to capture and kill dangerous predators for food, while being at risk of becoming the food of some other dangerous predator. We no longer have to go floor a mammoth to survive the winter.

Most of us these days, in the west at least, sit behind a computer all day.
And those of us who still do heavy lifting "men's work", like farming or manually (un)loading ships and stuff carrying bags upwards of 20kg... they still have an easier life then our ancestors did 100.000 years ago.

In our modern society, there is no longer a need for such daily activities. I'ld also guess that that is one of the prime reasons why the classical gender roles change. Society evolves and a lot of the jobs can be done by both men and women. Some jobs are done better by women and other jobs are done better by men, perhaps. But by and large, the majority of jobs can be done by both - without any need for physical changes or whatever.

Could it be that there will be physical change due to evolution? Well, yes... it's not like evolution as a process stops. It's not like you can resist it....

But more importantly, the idea of "...we may not necessarily want", makes little sense to me. We are talking about gradual change that will/might happen over many generations.
None of us currently alive will witness that. And the people who grow up in that world... it will simply be their reality. "i don't want this" is not what they will be saying. For them, that "new" reality will be normal.

 

[tyke]

Young women like her were employed in the thousands in collieries throughout Britain in the 19th Century. People have usually done what needs to be done to feed their families, irrespective of "gender roles".

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

I don't entirely agree, but I'll run with it.
In that respect, it doesn't really matter. It's not like we men are still responsible for going on hunts to capture and kill dangerous predators for food, while being at risk of becoming the food of some other dangerous predator. We no longer have to go floor a mammoth to survive the winter.

Most of us these days, in the west at least, sit behind a computer all day.
And those of us who still do heavy lifting "men's work", like farming or manually (un)loading ships and stuff carrying bags upwards of 20kg... they still have an easier life then our ancestors did 100.000 years ago.

In our modern society, there is no longer a need for such daily activities. I'ld also guess that that is one of the prime reasons why the classical gender roles change. Society evolves and a lot of the jobs can be done by both men and women. Some jobs are done better by women and other jobs are done better by men, perhaps. But by and large, the majority of jobs can be done by both - without any need for physical changes or whatever.

Could it be that there will be physical change due to evolution? Well, yes... it's not like evolution as a process stops. It's not like you can resist it....

But more importantly, the idea of "...we may not necessarily want", makes little sense to me. We are talking about gradual change that will/might happen over many generations.
None of us currently alive will witness that. And the people who grow up in that world... it will simply be their reality. "i don't want this" is not what they will be saying. For them, that "new" reality will be normal.

Okay. This question was asked because a decent amount of people believe men are being feminized and need to reclaim their manhood. That's what this premise was predicated on. It seems no one here agrees with that premise but to me Western culture is very feminine. From the clothes that are supposed to be in style to the ideas and education system. If there is disagreement on this then I can see why it would be hard to answer the question if you don't believe these things to be true.

To me it seems like normal boy behavior is looked down upon in schools. Which is why so many young boys are prescribed drugs like Adderall when they are just behaving like a normal boy. The classroom is more suited for girls because they don't have so much of that male energy that wants to explore at least in the way boys do.

 

[AV1611VET]

What would the world be like?

We would all be speaking German.

 

[Speedwell]

To me it seems like normal boy behavior is looked down upon in schools. Which is why so many young boys are prescribed drugs like Adderall when they are just behaving like a normal boy. The classroom is more suited for girls because they don't have so much of that male energy that wants to explore at least in the way boys do.

Ah, well, if you want to narrow it down to the egregious organizational culture of the public schools that's a different thing altogether.

 

[Hank77]

Okay. This question was asked because a decent amount of people believe men are being feminized and need to reclaim their manhood. That's what this premise was predicated on. It seems no one here agrees with that premise but to me Western culture is very feminine. From the clothes that are supposed to be in style to the ideas and education system. If there is disagreement on this then I can see why it would be hard to answer the question if you don't believe these things to be true.

To me it seems like normal boy behavior is looked down upon in schools. Which is why so many young boys are prescribed drugs like Adderall when they are just behaving like a normal boy. The classroom is more suited for girls because they don't have so much of that male energy that wants to explore at least in the way boys do.

What is going on in schools is a totally different matter. Parents who let the school raise their children and define who their child will become aren't doing their job, imo.

 

[tas8831]

The question is simply based off of how much more masculine women are today than at any point in history. And what do you think the implications would be if such an environment existed for hundreds of thousands of years.

ARE women more masculine today than any time in history?

Evidence?

 

[tas8831]

I was pretty sure this stuff was common knowledge but i guess it's not.

No, it sounds more like negative stereotyping and such to me.

But at a certain level, I see what you are getting at.

Ironically, the very policies and social constructs that the religious conservatives endorse at the higher levels of government have contributed a great deal to the necessity of these things that you appear to see as (and they definitely see as) negatives. Economic policies that favor the wealthy, remove or weaken social safety nets, etc., actually make it more likely that many 'gender roles' will be altered in the working poor in particular in order to make ends meet. If the wife makes more money at her job than the husband does, and the husband is not qualified for any other higher paying jobs, guess what - dad stays home.

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

ARE women more masculine today than any time in history?

Evidence?

Hilary clinton. and the millions of women like her. I voted for her btw so it's not like i don't like her.

 

[tas8831]

/thread

Wow.

Isn't it so horrible when everyone does not agree with you...

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

Wow.

Isn't it so horrible when everyone does not agree with you...

I didn't think it was so bad, but if they don't understand my question and i've tried to explain it as well as i can then i can take the L and move on. Even though I really don't think its too hard to see what im getting at and what i'm asking but if my premise is so controversial that people aren't even willing to answer it even hypothetically then theres nothing you can do.

 

[Loren T.]

The question is, given how much more masculine women are forced to become, how feminized men are becoming. What could the potential implications be if this continues for say another 200k years?

masculine=More women are the provider of their family now than ever, have jobs that mostly men had etc l
feminine=afraid to show aggression, forced to act more gentle to fit in school systems run by women, stay at home dads now exist when that was never a thing before,etc....

Aren't you speaking in generalities that only pertain to certain cultures? This stuff comes and goes, and it's not a world wide phenomenon.

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

When you talk about femininity and masculinity today people get offended and don't want to admit there is such a thing. If thats what people want to believe thats fine. I'm not saying men and women don't share similar traits that overlap but there are traits that we would see more out of women and vice versa. Thats all I meant by feminine and masculine but i guess even saying that is too hard to admit in a day and age where everyone is equal in the strictest sense.

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

Aren't you speaking in generalities that only pertain to certain cultures? This stuff comes and goes, and it's not a world wide phenomenon.

Does masculinity and feminity exist? If you do then whatever those words mean to you, use that to answer the hypothetical. People may not agree with what i think is feminine and masculine. But they don't have to as long as they have their own understanding of what those words mean they can answer the question.

 

[tas8831]

There is no such thing as ‘gender’. There is man, and woman. Boys, and girls. That is all. ‘Gender’ is a word that was made up by cultural Marxists with an agenda

Once I see phrases like that, I know that the rest is not worth reading.

 

[tas8831]

When you talk about femininity and masculinity today people get offended and don't want to admit there is such a thing.

Are these the same people that we are told on social media get offended at pictures of the flag and the WTC? Because I have never met such people, and every time - EVERY time - I have researched such claimed instances of 'offense' I have found that the claims are at the very least embellished, if not totally fabricated.

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

Are these the same people that we are told on social media get offended at pictures of the flag and the WTC? Because I have never met such people, and every time - EVERY time - I have researched such claimed instances of 'offense' I have found that the claims are at the very least embellished, if not totally fabricated.

What does feminine and masculine mean? It seems the biggest issue in this thread was to come to some type of agreement on what these terms actually mean. And even if there is no universal agreement on what is feminine and masculine, you can still theorize based off of your subjective definition of these terms what our world would be like if these things either didnt exist or were reversed. Thats all i'm saying in this thread.

 

[tas8831]

Hilary clinton. and the millions of women like her. I voted for her btw so it's not like i don't like her.

What makes he masculine? Pantsuits?

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

What makes he masculine? Pantsuits?

Now ya getting it.