Suggestion Why isn't there a "Men's Forum"?

[divad]

Just asking.

 

[lermontov]

How many men here, have wifes that don't post here?

I only have one

 

[Buliwyf]

Your location does kinda sound like Utah.

 

[lermontov]

 

[flyboy08]

Of the many only three of my wives speak English....we need a translation do Hickey

 

[cmulvaney]

I agree with everything you said @Diver0001 but here's the thing...
We don't get to have an opinion. If women want to have an exclusive area (which is not the SB one since it's men as well) then you and I have no right to even think that our opinions have any merit.

Until we have walked Into a room full of people who are all much larger than us and who mostly view us as an object we don't get to have an opinion.

Same with race, same with a lot of the social divisions. That's not to say we are wrong, it's just that it doesn't matter.

I could not disagree with you more. The statement that one does not get to have an opinion is just that... an opinion. Of course everyone has the right to an opinion. The same as everyone has a right to dismiss opinions they do not agree with. It is absolutely absurd that you believe someone's opinion doesn't matter so they don't get a chance to have one.

 

[uncfnp]

Well... I didn't set out to make this a philosophical discussion about gender relations but look at it this way.

For the same reasons that apartheid is not good for race relations or excluding and avoiding religious or cultural minorities is not good for social development of the society and the integration of these (sub) cultures, the segregation of men and women from each other is not good for gender relations.

To me, what is ... well, wrong... is to somehow convince people that avoiding each other will help them get along better. It's illogical, it's immoral, it's cynical and it's damaging. No model of human interaction you will find that works to encourage peaceful relations, compassion and appreciation of the issues that people living in the same society find important given their specific needs and wants will be based upon "us versus them" thinking.

Ergo.... if you look at why I said what I said, it wasn't to be insensitive. To my way of thinking a man who IS sensitive to the needs of women who want to participate in a sport with a large male population will encourage women to take their place as equals and to ENGAGE men on equal terms, even if it's hard at times and even if some men are massive jerks.
Encouraging "us versus them" thinking and tacitly suggesting that women are somehow not strong enough to participate on equal footing to the point that they somehow need a safe area away from the men is a severe and damaging form of sexism. It's not fair to women and it doesn't get anyone any closer to equality.

If I say much more it will become a political discussion about the type of society we want to have but suffice it to say that "us versus them" thinking, segregation and avoiding one another are all "weak bids" in my opinion by people who would prefer to perpetuate discord as the preferred model of human interaction. This does not only apply to men who would prefer to see women away in a corner chattering amongst themselves but also women, some of whom may even call themselves "feminists" who believe that avoiding men is a good idea.

Like I said I didn't set out to make this a philosophical discussion but the question of why there isn't a "mens" forum can't really be answered unless you look at the issues in a broader perspective.

R..

I am currently in Cozumel and just did four boat dives with more early am so this will be brief for now.

First your whole premise is wrong. The "women's forum" is not a form of segregation since, as many have said before, it is open to everyone. But the topic should be focused on female interests and responses appropriate to female specific needs, just as solo is solo topics, advanced is advanced topics, tech is tech topics and so forth.

And I will never understand why in order to be "equal" I have to meet the male model of society and be more like them.

 

[Bubblesong]

Well I PM'd NetDoc requesting a Men's Forum be added but he resists my persuasive and ingratiating pleas. He probably suspects me of plotting to post blush worthy men's topics. #thwarted.

 

[Diver0001]

And I will never understand why in order to be "equal" I have to meet the male model of society and be more like them.

That's exactly the "us versus them" thinking that I was referring to above.

Nobody says that women need to meet a male model. If you think back from the days of 1980's feminism then there was a definite intention to break down that model. That's also what is required; to engage in the ambient culture in order to effect changes. I phrased that above as engaging men as equals. What that means is to simply be yourself and call men out on their BS if they are being patronizing or sexist.

Think of it like this. When you combine hydrogen and oxygen, what results is neither hydrogen nor oxygen. It is something entirely else, namely water. This is what happens in society too if people are willing to interact with one another. Society evolves to accommodate differences...

I know this can be frustrating and take a lot of patience. I know this first hand because I am a minority in the country where I live and there is a lot of "anti foreigner" sentiment.... but I also know that if I allow myself to engage in "us versus them" thinking that I will shoot myself in the foot because as soon as you start thinking that the ambient culture is something bad that would prefer to reject then you are allowing yourself to be marginalized and you are no longer in a position to participate as an equal and affect any change for the better.

So when you ask why you have to conform to a male model, this is exactly what you are doing, rejecting "them" and in the process putting yourself in a pigeon-hole. That's not fair to yourself and that approach is an absolute guarantee that equality will remain out of reach.

So when I suggest to "engage" men as equals that doesn't mean "be like men", it means "be a woman and make sure men respect that".

Just a point of view, of course. We've drifted quite a way from the OP and I'm in danger of making this into a dissertation on feminism so I guess I should leave it at that and drop out of the discussion now so it doesn't get any more derailed.

R..

 

[The Chairman]

Well I PM'd NetDoc requesting a Men's Forum be added

As I said in the PM: In a male dominated sport, having a men's forum would only be placating puerile pot stirrers.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

That's exactly the "us versus them" thinking that I was referring to above.

Nobody says that women need to meet a male model. If you think back from the days of 1980's feminism then there was a definite intention to break down that model. That's also what is required; to engage in the ambient culture in order to effect changes. I phrased that above as engaging men as equals. What that means is to simply be yourself and call men out on their BS if they are being patronizing or sexist.

Think of it like this. When you combine hydrogen and oxygen, what results is neither hydrogen nor oxygen. It is something entirely else, namely water. This is what happens in society too if people are willing to interact with one another. Society evolves to accommodate differences...

I know this can be frustrating and take a lot of patience. I know this first hand because I am a minority in the country where I live and there is a lot of "anti foreigner" sentiment.... but I also know that if I allow myself to engage in "us versus them" thinking that I will shoot myself in the foot because as soon as you start thinking that the ambient culture is something bad that would prefer to reject then you are allowing yourself to be marginalized and you are no longer in a position to participate as an equal and affect any change for the better.

So when you ask why you have to conform to a male model, this is exactly what you are doing, rejecting "them" and in the process putting yourself in a pigeon-hole. That's not fair to yourself and that approach is an absolute guarantee that equality will remain out of reach.

So when I suggest to "engage" men as equals that doesn't mean "be like men", it means "be a woman and make sure men respect that".

Just a point of view, of course. We've drifted quite a way from the OP and I'm in danger of making this into a dissertation on feminism so I guess I should leave it at that and drop out of the discussion now so it doesn't get any more derailed.

R..

I guess maybe I see things a bit differently ... at least as it relates to scuba diving. It isn't about equality so much as equivalency. I'll go with an example from when I was an instructor. When my female students had questions about specific scuba equipment or issues relating to female physiology, I'd refer them to one or more of several women scuba instructors/shop owners I know in my area. My reasoning was simply that, as a guy I can't really relate to the perspectives that women have to consider ... particularly when purchasing equipment that was initially designed for men and adapted for women. Obviously, women have different bodies in terms of how equipment is going to fit, feel, and perform than men do ... and my experiences and preferences may not really apply to them. Nowadays that's a lot less of an issue, as more and more equipment is coming out specifically for women. But there are still things to consider that a guy really can't relate to. The cut of a drysuit (or wetsuit), how an undergarment is going to fit and perform, the "best" choice of fin, how certain types of masks fit, how a weight belt accommodates a woman's hips ... things of that nature. Some questions I feel pretty comfortable answering ... others I'd want to defer to someone who has experienced the nuances of using specific equipment and can provide more first-hand on the potential benefits/drawbacks that a woman would want to consider. And I don't even want to touch some of the questions that pertain to differences in physiology, as I can only provide answers that I've read about rather than experienced.

Let's be honest ... despite the changes in the industry over the past couple decades, scuba diving is still a male-dominated recreational activity. And ScubaBoard reflects that dominance. Having a women's issues forum makes a certain amount of sense ... otherwise it's just too hard to sift through the many forums and threads to find information about an issue where a woman's perspective is going to be different from a man's. The same can't be said in reverse, as most threads are dominated by the male point of view. And while there might be some value added in a men's issues forum, I suspect it'd quickly get taken over by people who are there not to talk about scuba-related topics, but instead to troll or to make a "political" statement with respect to having a separate forum ... which would circumvent the purpose of having it in the first place.

I don't particularly see the problem here. The Women's Issues forum has been around for a long time, and seems to satisfy a need. I don't see that the same could be said to justify a Men's Issues forum ... although I'd be open to anyone telling me why it would.

What we have today seems to be working ... and as the saying goes, "if it works, don't fix it" ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)