Should there be a Men’s History Month?

[Heartache0405]

If there’s a Women’s history month, where all of the female accomplishments sure recognized for an entire month, why shouldn’t there be a Men’s History Month? Where we acknowledge Men’s positive achievements instead of their negative ones? Shouldn’t Men’s positive achievements be recognized just as women’s are?

I feel like there should be a Men’s History Month because people only think of Men’s negative impacts in the world... And that doesn’t seem fair at all... We should recognize men’s achievements. Like for example how men have fought in all of the world’s previous wars to keep their women and children safe and free at the cost of their own lives. Or how when shit it’s the fan it was the men who had to be left behind while the women and children escaped. There are plenty more positive Male achievements that aren’t recognized that are extremely undervalued in society in order to make way for female recognition when in all honesty, do they really deserve it when all they did was for themselves and other women? While men have sacrificed their own lives for the betterment of others? Regardless of whether they wanted to or not? All I’m saying is celebrating women for their own achievements is extremely selfish in my opinion especially when there isn’t even a men’s history month or something equivalent to women’s history month. Who even started the ridiculous idea of (placeholder) history month? This doesn’t bring us together at all.

Yes, there should be a Men’s History Month where we recognize Men’s positive achievements throughout history instead of the negative ones

No, Men don’t deserve their own History Month. They’ve done too much negative that far outweighs the positive.

[Eduman]

Celebrate women and celebrate men; humanity cannot survive without both, and each needs to maintain a positive view of the other.

Months that celebrate subsets of people should be determined by the similar and opposite hypothetical question: Should we devote a month to celebrate the positive contributions of a subgroup that has verifiably contributed less than all other subgroups? If the answer to that question is “yes,” then you must observe absolutely every other group.
To suggest otherwise is to be motivated by one of two options:
1) Hostility towards the group (s) that contribute most.
2) The idea that lesser people need more attention to boost their moral.

Either way—hostility is clearly involved.
In the second case hostility is involved by the dominant group projecting the notion that: since everyone knows the other group positively contributes least of all—that group must be suffering from that realization, so they need special and dishonestly-motivated attention to make them feel like as if they do as much as those that clearly do much more.

[sirderpsalot123]

I don't think Men's History Month is needed. The history we learn is basically men's history. Even if it was necessary, people would get offended the same way people get offended over National Men's Day... If people get upset about talking about men's mental/physical health (basically what men's day is about) just imagine the backlash having a Men's History month would receive. No thanks lol

[Heartache0405]

You’re right, but doesn’t that show that there is a problem in society? At least to those who are oblivious to it?

Now the whole matrix thing the MRA talk about makes sense 😂

[Eduman]

The underlying motivation for this commonly pushed reasoning only promotes hostility towards an entire set of people.

Honoring the positive contributions of sets of people should not be motivated by animus— currently it obviously is. Every set of people has some subset of people that have positively contributed to their people and to humanity as a whole. Explicitly rejecting the observation of those that have verifiably contributed more over time is outright hostile, dishonest, and promotes a negative valuation of those people.

The same happens in the context of sub-groups, and you can bet you right arm that this will only continue to be pushed with the same logic you’re applying here. When the notion that Women’s History Month is pushed over the various media as being “too White,” then you can expect to find people saying “we don’t need to celebrate the positive contributions of White women, because we do that everyday.” Then what do we have? Then we have the notion that White women are less deserving of observation—regardless of their share of contribution—and the notion that they are not worthy of respect. That is an absolutely horrible and hateful way of looking at people. The same applies to men, and to the various subsets of men as well.

Ultimately, if we are going to devote attention to honoring the positive contributions of one set of people, then we should not refuse to honor those of others—especially those that we can verify have positively contributed most. Anything less is nothing short of explicit hostility.

[sirderpsalot123]

The whole point of Women's History Month is to give an accurate representation of women throughout history. Accomplishments of men are well taught and respected. We don't need a special month. Teaching women's history dosen't detract from men in any way. There isn't anything hateful about it.

[Heartache0405]

Than why do so many people only consider the negative things men have done and never the positive things? But when they think of women they can’t think of anything negative they’ve done. Only the negative things men have done? Which always overshadow men’s positives apparently. Is that not wrong? Is that not a hypocritical double standard?

[lrina]

or how about, we don't give a month to anybody? i find women's month, black month, hispanic month, and whatever other months/days there are based on race, culture, or gender pointless. i think it's best if we just exclude those in general.

[Heartache0405]

That’d be nice. I’m all for that. It just created more division anyway.

[lrina]

although it's supposed to highlight "accomplishments" and what not you're right, just creates controversy and division.

[notwoke]

amen

[Wade12345]

We need a White History Month. It's unfair that blacks are "celebrated" for being criminals and drug addicts while Whites are blamed for all of black people's problems.

I HATE blm and I HATE black history month. It's racist crap spewed by N-WORD HERE idiots.

[lrina]

such a waste of time in my opinion

[notwoke]

that goes against the false narrative, be careful

[Anonymous]

There could be a Men's History Year where we discuss everything we have and how our systems all work because of men.
They would call it white supremacy. Everyone would rather tear white men down than acknowledge them. Unless there's a war of course, then white men better perform for the good of everyone.

[MCheetah]

Honestly, there shouldn't be any token months anymore.

[Heartache0405]

Agreed. That would make everything better. If only the women would agree. Yet they’re too selfish to let something for themselves go

[MickHardin]

It will never happen. The media won't allow such a thing, are you kidding? The politician who would mention this would be totally cancelled. Someone might get the wrong idea that some men are needed, can't have that.

[Miristheiss]

How about we don't have any special months.
They are idiotic.

[VanillaSalt]

I wanna say no because fuck celebrating one or the other… who cares about men who cares about women who cares about blacks or whites or Latinos… I only care about people.

[Kiran_Yagami]

I don't care. I don't observe women's history month or black history month or any of that other horse shit. I wouldn't observe men's history month either.

[AviatorTom]

Why should only women get a month to celebrate. That's blatant sexism.

[Anonymous]

He looks unhappy let's have a month but with all the contributions it will probably take almost a year

[Juxtapose]

Only weak people need their own months, we're too strong for that 🤜🤛

[andreasderjuengere]

Why would I want to cheer on " my" history?
My better contributions are still to come :)

[Anonymous]

I choose option C:
Men have done way too much in society that one month is not enough to go over all the major changes.

on a side note we dont need a month to recognize achievements made by men. Just be thankful that these individuals pushed the limits of human knowledge and crafted a new world where we are able to live and thrive in

[Heartache0405]

If only people did recognize those positive achievements... instead of only the negative ones... I rarely hear people these days expressing thankfulness towards men like how they do towards women. Who have only done things throughout history for themselves... <.<

[CuriousMufuxka]

No. In fact there should be no history months. We all have the ability to honor whoever whenever.

[Dargil]

We don't need that. Almost all history is men's history.

[Massageman]

- - and a White History Month - - - and a This and a That History Month - - - -

[Recurrence]

I don’t think history months are effective, I’d rather have education reform

[notwoke]

this goes against the narrative, so no, can't be done. The left would come unglued

[anylolone]

No, there shouldn't be history months, at all.

[BarryLiverstone]

Nope