opanihuya wrote...
I agree. Regretfully that opinion lacked realism which is unpractical.
Because it's totally the best thing for people to adhere to the standards that society forces on them? Men not crying, women not living a life fulfilling their career dreams, and choosing to not get married or have a family? Really? That lacks 'realism'?
The question posed is "Is it manly to ignore or to fight a bully?". Determining your choice based on what society tells you you should be because of your sex is what's impractical, and unrealistic.
People should make choices based on what is right for them. What is practical for the moment.
If people went around thinking 'Gosh, I shouldn't do that, because I'm a guy!', the entirety of our world population would be fucking miserable.
My argument was that basing decisions based on what you think society tells you to do based on what's between your legs, is impractical, and in the case of violent situations, impractical and dangerous.
So no. :3 I literally have no idea why you said it was impractical, because it sure as hell wasn't.
Bill wrote...
I do agree with you on that, it is kind of silly to say that masculinity and feminism don't hold any real meaning to life when that is obviously not the case.
They don't. Not in a practical sense. Masculine or feminine in the grand scheme are standards that have no real merit. They 'mean something' because society has concocted gender roles - women are soft and nurturing, men are hardened and combative. Holding situations up to the light of 'masculine vs feminine' is stupid.
Be who you are, do what feels fucking right. But sorry, no, refusing to do something because it's what your sex 'shouldn't do', or doing something simply because 'you should' is a waste of a decision.