5 ms·

I think the "toxic masculinity" label isn't being heard by young males quite the way you intend. Drumming the word 'toxic' in front of 'masculinity' and a lot

I think the "toxic masculinity" label isn't being heard by young males quite the way you intend. Drumming the word 'toxic' in front of 'masculinity' and a lot of kids are going to believe, "it's poisonous to be male". That's because kids lack the insights and knowledge to think beyond the literal meanings of those words. I wonder if you think there won't be consequences to your words? I wonder what you think the consequences might be? I hope you'll be pleased to learn that aggressive tendencies can encouraged, shepherded, and focused towards the positive. So, perhaps "unfocused aggression" is the more politically correct negative label you were searching for? Your word choice is too full of hurt. (I'm sorry if some men have hurt you.) It's not a spite thing, but we just cannot let your feelings win the day, and you have to lose this fight for all our sakes. We want our men to be aggressive, competent, and noble creatures after all. We'll silence your "toxic masculinity" messages at every opportunity with our powerful charm and energy. We'll show our young men how to be the boss and love our women too. ;)

throwaway413 8y ago
> our women Please tell me you forgot the /s on this post.
- kadenshep 8y ago
  He is not. He's hitting like every disgusting talking point there is.
kadenshep 8y ago
> Drumming the word 'toxic' in front of 'masculinity' and a lot of kids are going to believe, "it's poisonous to be male". No they aren't, and they don't. I can garauntee that most kids (who you don't seem have to much experience with) have more than enough intelligence to understand how adjectives and nouns work.
s73v3r_ 8y ago
No. I'm sorry, but your entire message is a shining example of "toxic masculinity". This idea that the man cannot show emotion, cannot be vulnerable, and must be in charge at all times. And that "and love our women too" bit is really creepy. Especially the "our" part, indicating that they are your property. That is a textbook sign of toxic masculinity, and a big red flag in the advent of the "incel" movement. Far, far too many of those young men see women as property that they are owed.
- EdSharkey 8y ago
  Do I think I own my wife like chattel? No. Is she 'mine'? Yes, she is; I won her heart, period. I don't share her with other men, and that's not me being facetious. If you don't understand how that works and cannot appreciate this healthy male point of view, then that's your tough lesson to learn. My wife is a third wave feminist, she wouldn't be dominated by me if I tried. And that's not right to think that way, and I don't act like a dominant a-hole that way, for the record. But she clearly looks to me for leadership of the family, and I gratefully, joyfully provide that leadership. So I am legitimately dominant in many aspects of our relationship, just not by force.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> Drumming the word 'toxic' in front of 'masculinity' and a lot of kids are going to believe, "it's poisonous to be male". That's because kids lack the insights and knowledge to think beyond the literal meanings of those words. The literal meaning of the words is “a subset of the traits traditionally associated with men that is toxic”, not “being male, which is inherently toxic”, as you seem to have interpreted it, which both incorrectly understands the literal meaning of masculinity, and incorrectly understands the literal meaning of applying an adjective to modify a noun: my two year old son has little trouble understanding that the phrase “red cars” refers to the subset of cars which are red rather than asserting that all cars are red. So, even to the extent that young people might be unable to see past the literal meaning of words, the literal meaning here is exactly what is intended, and entirely unlike the decidedly non-literal interpretation you've misrepresented as the literal meaning. > We want our men to be aggressive We who?
- EdSharkey 8y ago
  > The literal meaning of the words is “a subset of the traits traditionally associated with men that is toxic”. You are being pedantic. Kids won't hit Wikipedia to get the full nuance of your preferred labels. I haven't misrepresented anything. Have you ever asked kids if they've heard the term 'toxic masculinity' used and if they have, what they think it means/how it makes them feel? You're going to get some shockingly low resolution answers. > We who? As much 'we' as we can get. On this board, that might tend towards the royal we. ;) Consider that aggression has a positive application. Mastery and domination can occur in and over the self first and then outward in the world as required next, and that's the 'good' kind of aggression we like to foster. Self-control is learned, and boys need guidance channeling their instinct for achievement towards applicable skills development. I welcome questions like yours though as it spurs these illuminating discussions. I'm hoping you can appreciate a different but logically consistent and legitimate worldview from your own. I want to accentuate the positive and eliminate the negative just as much as the next person. I suspect you and I view typical male attributes differently where you might seek to suppress rather than celebrate/foster appropriately.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago

throwaway413 8y ago

> our women Please tell me you forgot the /s on this post.

kadenshep 8y ago
He is not. He's hitting like every disgusting talking point there is.

kadenshep 8y ago

> Drumming the word 'toxic' in front of 'masculinity' and a lot of kids are going to believe, "it's poisonous to be male". No they aren't, and they don't. I can garauntee that most kids (who you don't seem have to much experience with) have more than enough intelligence to understand how adjectives and nouns work.

s73v3r_ 8y ago

No. I'm sorry, but your entire message is a shining example of "toxic masculinity". This idea that the man cannot show emotion, cannot be vulnerable, and must be in charge at all times. And that "and love our women too" bit is really creepy. Especially the "our" part, indicating that they are your property. That is a textbook sign of toxic masculinity, and a big red flag in the advent of the "incel" movement. Far, far too many of those young men see women as property that they are owed.

EdSharkey 8y ago
Do I think I own my wife like chattel? No. Is she 'mine'? Yes, she is; I won her heart, period. I don't share her with other men, and that's not me being facetious. If you don't understand how that works and cannot appreciate this healthy male point of view, then that's your tough lesson to learn. My wife is a third wave feminist, she wouldn't be dominated by me if I tried. And that's not right to think that way, and I don't act like a dominant a-hole that way, for the record. But she clearly looks to me for leadership of the family, and I gratefully, joyfully provide that leadership. So I am legitimately dominant in many aspects of our relationship, just not by force.

dragonwriter 8y ago

> Drumming the word 'toxic' in front of 'masculinity' and a lot of kids are going to believe, "it's poisonous to be male". That's because kids lack the insights and knowledge to think beyond the literal meanings of those words. The literal meaning of the words is “a subset of the traits traditionally associated with men that is toxic”, not “being male, which is inherently toxic”, as you seem to have interpreted it, which both incorrectly understands the literal meaning of masculinity, and incorrectly understands the literal meaning of applying an adjective to modify a noun: my two year old son has little trouble understanding that the phrase “red cars” refers to the subset of cars which are red rather than asserting that all cars are red. So, even to the extent that young people might be unable to see past the literal meaning of words, the literal meaning here is exactly what is intended, and entirely unlike the decidedly non-literal interpretation you've misrepresented as the literal meaning. > We want our men to be aggressive We who?

EdSharkey 8y ago
> The literal meaning of the words is “a subset of the traits traditionally associated with men that is toxic”. You are being pedantic. Kids won't hit Wikipedia to get the full nuance of your preferred labels. I haven't misrepresented anything. Have you ever asked kids if they've heard the term 'toxic masculinity' used and if they have, what they think it means/how it makes them feel? You're going to get some shockingly low resolution answers. > We who? As much 'we' as we can get. On this board, that might tend towards the royal we. ;) Consider that aggression has a positive application. Mastery and domination can occur in and over the self first and then outward in the world as required next, and that's the 'good' kind of aggression we like to foster. Self-control is learned, and boys need guidance channeling their instinct for achievement towards applicable skills development. I welcome questions like yours though as it spurs these illuminating discussions. I'm hoping you can appreciate a different but logically consistent and legitimate worldview from your own. I want to accentuate the positive and eliminate the negative just as much as the next person. I suspect you and I view typical male attributes differently where you might seek to suppress rather than celebrate/foster appropriately.
- dragonwriter 8y ago