Wie schadet das Patriarchat eigentlich Männern?

Auf Reddit wird eine interessante Frage gestellt:

Patriarchy hurting men is a buzzword that is usually thrown around to encourage men to abandon the traditional system (which is flawed no doubt.)

However, I must admit that I don’t completely understand how does a system meant to give men all the power also hurt them?

Ich hatte die Frage auch schon mal aufgegriffen etwa hier:

• „Strukturelle und institutionalisierte Diskriminierung von Männer gibt es nicht“ vs „Die Strukturen des Patriarchats benachteiligen auch Männer“
• Diskussionen mit Feministen: Diskriminierung von Männern, das Patriarchat schadet auch Männern, und matriarchale oder patriarchale Strukturen
• Feministische Theoriewoche II: „Das Patriarchat schadet auch den Männern vs. Männer sind nicht unterdrückt“
• „Das Patriarchat schadet auch Männern“ (Patriarchy hurts men too)

Mal sehen, was man bei Reddit in der AskFeminists Gruppe meint:

It’s not meant to give “men” all the power. It’s meant to give a few men most of the power. The rest of the men only have power relative to women. And that’s part one of how patriarchy hurts men—it gives them an underclass to focus on oppressing instead of actually addressing the systemic problems, and thereby keeps them oppressed.

Men are held to strict gender roles that refuse them the full emotional range (and responsibility) of humans. Because of the power differential (or the perception of power) men who are sexually harassed or assaulted aren’t given support they need (because “real men” always want sex and sexual attention). Men are expected to provide financially and protect, but the first part isn’t really feasible for most people and the second part…is ONLY against physical dangers, so a man (for instance) who doesn’t out-aggress another man is deemed “feminine” (and remember that feminine is the worst thing to be). Additionally, physical attacks are not nearly as common as many believe (though still depressingly common), so men rarely (if ever) have an opportunity to “prove their worth”. And if they fail? Well, again, they’re feminine.

There’s just so much bullshit.

Das ist wohl einer der häufigeren Ansätze: Plötzlich haben nur ein paar Männer die Vorteile und die anderen Männer nur Vorteile gegenüber Frauen (was ja dann auch eigentlich ein Vorteil wäre, aber es ist dann wieder doch keiner und zudem zählt es nicht für den Opferstatus, weil Männer ja nur von anderen Männern unterdrückt werden und immer noch Privilegien haben, aber dann doch wieder Schaden davon nehmen, trotz aller Privilegien. Sind das dann überhaupt noch Privilegien? Müssen sie ja, sonst wären Männer nicht privilegiert.

Zustimmung kommt hier:

OMG this! And let me tell you why it is so effective. Because the oldest trick in the book to keep the people you are oppressing distracted so they don’t notice your abuses of them or try to create change is to give them a target to focus on and oppress.

The thing about the target though is it can’t just go willingly, because then there is no conflict. Nothing to oppress. Nothing for the oppressor to do.

If the men being superior to women was the natural state of human beings, we wouldn’t even be talking about it, it would just be. It wouldn’t need to be written about as prescribed behavior for women and men in religious texts. It wouldn’t need to be enshrined into laws and we certainly wouldn’t need to be indoctrinated with it from the day we are born. The patriarchy tells men that they are superior to women so that those men (who while benefitting from the patriarchy in small ways, aren’t actually running the show) will stay busy trying to oppress their women and maintain what little power they think they are owed.

Also es geht ihnen besser als Frauen, aber es würde ihnen vermutlich dann noch besser gehen, wenn alle frei und fröhlich sein könnten und niemand mehr jemanden unterdrücken würde, ich vermute das ist der Ansatz.

Und etwas kürzer:

Patriarchy generally advocates for traditional gender roles and toxic masculinity. Which damages men psychologically and emotionally.

Ich finde die Formel ja immer sehr einfach, gerade wenn man zum einen pränatales Testosteron bedenkt, aber auch das Frauen Männlichkeit durchaus einfordern und immer eingefordert haben, was und zu sexueller Selektion auf Männlichkeit bringt.

Und der gleiche Ansatz:

t damages certain men psychologically and emotionally.

There are a lot of dudes out there who are 100% „traditional“ toxic masculine assholes and live in communities (go to any rural area in America) where that is actively encouraged and rewarded in every possible way. It’s the people who fail to achieve the toxic masculinity role in this community who are damaged psychologically and emotionally, but the people who are actually toxic are doing pretty great.

Theoretisch wäre es da das beste für die Männer möglichst „toxisch“ zu werden.

Und von einem Mann:

I’m 72m US. Straight. Married nearly 50 years. Three adult children   6 soon to be 7 grandchildren. Homeowner. Zero debt. Still working

In other words „successful“ and I have to say some of it is from my being a man in this construct

Yet it does hurt me because I find myself STILL pretending to be what society thinks I’m supposed to be.

I failed as a manager because (as my review said) I cared too much about the people reporting to me

I had a friend at work who happened to be a woman and many people (including my wife for a while) assumed I wanted to „bang her“ because I guess that’s what men are supposed to want

I finally got my wife to stop telling me to „man up“ when I wasnt aggressive enough to deal with salespeople or contractors or others.

She tried to shame me by taking care of such matters herself and implying I was less than a man because I needed her to step in

(by the way counseling helped resolve those matters years ago and we almost laugh about it now)

I was called a sissy and a f@g and other things growing up because I was weak and non athletic and enjoyed talking rather than physical things. I had no idea how to fix cars or build things nor did I care to learn. I was a geek. A nerd. A loser. I was even beat up a few times.

So the patriarchy hurt me

And yet none of that even comes close to the effect it has on women every day

Das Patriarchat, anscheinend nicht ganz unwesentlich in Form seiner Frau, verletzte ihn.

und:

No, “patriarchy hurts men” isn’t a buzzword. It’s a fact about a society mainly dominated by men.

Patriarchy hurts plenty of men that don’t conform to whatever the “masculine” standards are. Gay men, effeminate men, trans men… all these types of men suffer under oppression and are ridiculed or made fun of. In certain countries they’re killed or shunned from everybody else.

Under heavily patriarchal societies men’s SA often isn’t recognized, especially if it was done by a woman.

Men berating other men for being a virgin, not picking up enough women, or telling men they shouldn’t show emotion is another way men suffer under the patriarchy.

Es ist schon erstaunlich, dass man einfach „das alles ist das Patriarchat“ sagen kann ohne irgendwie weitere Zusammenhänge zu hinterfragen.