The Way You Are Expected To Act By Others: Fill & Download for Free

Boys are commonly shown less compassion than girls from an early age (amongst other things, boys are picked up after and slower than girls when they cry).Although a majority of women make less than men on the job; men are expected to relocate more often, work longer hours, and to keep a smaller cut of their paycheques for themselves than women due to socially decided portions of obligations such as mortgages, romantic outings, and such.Men are expected to occupy the most dangerous and/or lowest paying jobs and positions (waste collection, roofing and construction, truck driving, mining, logging, firefighting, most things related to war).The pressure on women to 'hold down a man' is synonymous with the pressure on men to 'hold down a job.'Women are expected to date up, men are expected to date down. A man is expected to be taller, smarter, more athletic, and earn more than his female companion. There's also a gender-specific ageism at play (preference for older men, and younger women).Men are conditioned to reject anything feminine within themselves such as emotions, frailty, and so on (homophobia could be argued as a physical and violent manifestation of this conditioned rejection).Children bestow more love upon their stay-at-home moms than their sole-providing dads (this comes with the territory of his being away from the family for the longest period of time, multiple times). Husbands report, the few that do, that they feel as if they're providing for a family that no longer loves them quite the way they used to.Throughout history women were/are treated as property, but men were/are expected to die for their property [and home and nation, which constitute as property] (some people, like Warren Farrell, conclude that they're thus viewed as being worth less than their property).Male-on-male violence is treated as a sport, as an ideal, and as entertainment than for what it actually is. And men who choose not to participate in such violence are looked down upon by both men and women.The stats are iffy on this, but the combination of casually shunned female-on-male rape and male-on-male rape in places such as prison paints men as both leading victims of sexual violence and as the most silent majority (hence why the stats are iffy).There's no male equivalent of anything that a man can lie about a woman that can ruin her life, reputation, and career as dramatically as a woman's false cry of abuse or rape.The combination of marriage and divorce is heavily sided against men in countries like the USA; men are expected to provide financial support for their wives and women to provide emotional support for their husbands, and after divorce ex-husbands are expected to continue their financial support in some way while ex-wives continuing their emotional support after divorce is unheard of.Most media of entertainment without readily viewable violence or action of some kind favour women as they are the main consumers of such media (for example, the majority of books and daytime adult television is aimed towards women). And in a capitalist economy, those who consume set the standard (and media sets the cultural standard).Light forms of male subservience are labelled as chivalrous and gentlemanly and widely expected (imagine seeing women open doors and pull out chairs for men).Forced polygyny is viewed as being something that harms women more than it does men, but it harms both sexes equally in the long run (in the short run it, of course, harms women far more). Forced polygyny in a sense is the act of a [rich] man depriving another [poor] man of the potential for marriage and offspring.When a man and a woman commit the same crime the man will most times receive a harsher sentence and be assumed the initiator if the man and woman were partners in crime (this is largely sexist towards women in that it believes men to be more in control of their own actions, but it's a double-edged sword).In all cases of sexism, against males and females alike, both parties are always at fault (to what degree is dependent on the specific issue at hand); as in society at large is to blame most of all for perpetuating things under the guises (or as Michael Kaufman puts it best the collective hallucinations) of 'manhood, womanhood, and roles.'I'm a feminist who strongly believes that feminism, as an equality movement, should discuss these issues as fervently as it does more female-centered inequalities, however unpopular they are with females. Things are only going to get better when we stop viewing all of these gender issues as 'us vs them' instead of the actual 'we' (this system is flawed, we're all hurting); more people should read the works of people like Kenneth Clatterbaugh). Dialogues trump monologues.

Very rarely.Lay people are not required to act to save another person in the US. But you cannot put the person in worse circumstances. Let’s say someone is drowning. The person is holding on to something. You say, “here grab my hand.” The person releases what he is holding to grab on to your hand. You however pull your hand away and say “ha ha, sucker.” Then you could potentially be held liable. Potentially both financially and criminally. This is because you intentionally or in a grossly negligent fashion (depending on what you did) put the person in a worse situation. You cannot begin saving someone and put him in a worse situation than if you had just left him alone.Similarly, if the person is in no real danger and you rush to help and make the situation worse, then you could conceivably be successfully sued. You are expected to behave reasonably in your efforts to help other people, if you make the decision to help them and begin to act.If, on the other hand, you grab someone from a situation where had you left him, he was clearly going to die, and in doing so, he becomes seriously injured. You reasonably moved him and you are very unlikely to be successfully sued under those circumstances. You saved his life, after all.People are expected to behave reasonably in their encounters with other people. If you do so, then you are unlikely to have much to worry about. It is when you behave with gross negligence or you behave in an intentionally bad way that you are likely to run into trouble.Many states have Good Samaritan laws. Those might well spell out when you could be held liable for acting.

You can’t treat somebody like a child and expect them to act like an adult. Schools tend to treat 17 year olds like 6 year olds and expect them to act like adults. Want them to act like adults? Treat them like adults.Treat students the way you want them to treat teachers. You can’t treat your students like shit and then expect them to worship the fucking ground you walk on.Students are different — acknowledge that. There is no blanket answer to complicated things with students, what works with some students isn’t going to work with others in areas like punishment, revision, and mental health.Get rid of mandatory apologies. You can punish a student but don’t force them to apologise — an apology means nothing unless it’s done on the person’s own accord.Take your students more seriously. If a student says somebody (a parent, other student, teacher) is hurting them, take them fucking seriously, don’t discard it just because they’re a child/teen.That’s all I have for now.