7 ms·

You are totally right about the workaholics. I have energy, destructive or constructive. My environment chooses which way that energy flows. I'm lucky I have a

You are totally right about the workaholics. I have energy, destructive or constructive. My environment chooses which way that energy flows. I'm lucky I have a 100 year old house that steals all my time with needing to be fixed otherwise I'd be finding trouble on the weekends. I think a lot of men exist lacking hard physical and mentally demanding work, like working in a factory or on a farm, that can act as an outlet and as a thing to be proud of.

johnchristopher 7y ago
While I agree I want to add, for the sake of the conversation only, that it somehow paints a picture of men as beasts to be tamed (by work, by enrolling, etc.).
- SmellyGeekBoy 7y ago
  Humans are animals after all, no matter how highly we think of ourselves.
  - mettamage 7y ago
    We are indeed. But I'd argue that some animals are more civilized than you think. Primal behavior is simply partially out of ignorance (that's how it seems to me). Humans are relatively unique in: 1. Language 2. Tool use (thanks to being land-dwellers, two legged, and having opposable thumbs) 3. Having a prefrontal cortex that allows us to inhibit any other instinct we have Other animals have this as well to some degree or another, even all 3 of them. These 3 things combined allow us to sometimes escape our primal nature. But I wonder whether we're alone in that: how about dolphins, elephants and other animals of that sort?
    - nicoburns 7y ago
      I find that out capacity to override behaviours using our prefrontal cortex is strongly affected by the extent to which our base needs are met. Obvious example: hangry people. I think social exclusion is another case where people's base needs aren't being met.
      - mettamage 7y ago
        Fair point, our prefrontal cortices do not have that much power on their own without such conditions being met.
  - woodruffw 7y ago
    Humans are also 65% oxygen by mass, but most of us don't think that we're at our best when we combust. Our animal reality constrains the ways in which we can behave, but says nothing about how we ought to behave within that realm of possibility.
- FussyZeus 7y ago
  I see this as a side effect of the ideals toxic masculinity puts forth. I was under that for a long time and I'm still learning through therapy how to express myself properly, because it was simply drilled into me that men don't express feelings besides rage, that anything else you feel is "weakness," that it's important to remain stoic and focused in all situations, etc. I mean yeah it makes you really valuable in certain situations but it also makes your daily life hell.
  - EGreg 7y ago
    I disagree with the idea of toxic masculinity because, as presented, it seems to have been abused (or, in hacker parlance, overloaded). Can you name a few uniquely or predominantly masculine traits which would NOT be called toxic masculinity by someone prominent?
    - stefco_ 7y ago
      Not GP, but: I think it's a useful phrase, though it's often overloaded/misapplied/used vaguely. Some (generally recognized as) non-toxic stereotypically masculine traits include having confidence, a can-do attitude, being protective, trying to be helpful, being intellectual, being silly, leading people towards common goals. Even anger in moderation is not inherently toxic (we all feel it). These things can all be terrible in excess, of course, so I think sometimes people fairly call an excess of these things toxic (even if the trait itself is great in moderation). It's also bad if you are only allowed to embody a specific set of traits and behaviors; clearly men should not be limited to these traits (though the societal pressures to conform to traits like these are strong and are often what are referred to as "toxic masculinity" in reasonable discourse). Likewise, women should clearly be seen as equally capable of possessing these stereotypically masculine traits. I think a lot of the use of "toxic masculinity" is in reference to the fact that men are often strongly discouraged, explicitly and implicitly, from doing things that are seen as non-masculine. This causes behavior that's harmful to oneself and others, like taking out all your emotions as anger, or feeling like violence is the most powerful and respected way to make an impact. In more benign forms, it can come from an excess of an otherwise good trait, like going from confident to cocky. Many people will use the term vaguely/badly, but I think the usage I just described is useful. I think the most important point is that "toxic masculinity" (in its useful and precise form) is very different from saying "men are toxic". It's closer to "men face toxic pressure due to people's gender expectations that cause them to suffer and sometimes hurt others as well". It's about the societal pressure to conform to a narrow and inadequate spectrum of behaviors. It's like men are expected to span a 3D emotional space with only 1 emotional "basis vector" since the other 2 are effeminate. The 1 basis vector is not itself "toxic"; it's the denial of the other 2 vectors.
- rpmisms 7y ago
  That's not a pleasant turn of phrase, but how inaccurate is it? We've all been angsty balls of testosterone at some point in our lives, and focusing that energy is the only thing that helps. Talking about feelings isn't always what's needed. Sometimes you have to get out there and break/make something.
  - jcims 7y ago
    What’s the saying? Idle hands clear the path to enlightenment? Uhhh. From idle hands idyl lands?
    - type0 7y ago
      And ultimately this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faust,_Part_Two#Act_V https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faust,_Part_Two#Act_V
Balgair 7y ago
>I have energy, destructive or constructive. Plato talked about this in Phaedrus about the allegory of the Chariot [0,1]. I think it's a useful lens to view the desires we humans have, though not a perfect lens: >First the charioteer of the human soul drives a pair, and secondly one of the horses is noble and of noble breed, but the other quite the opposite in breed and character. Therefore in our case the driving is necessarily difficult and troublesome. The Charioteer represents intellect, reason, or the part of the soul that must guide the soul to truth; one horse represents rational or moral impulse or the positive part of passionate nature (e.g., righteous indignation); while the other represents the soul's irrational passions, appetites, or concupiscent nature. The Charioteer directs the entire chariot/soul, trying to stop the horses from going different ways, and to proceed towards enlightenment. In the modern west, we have an idea of 'Pious vs. Evil' that each of us tries to balance (super broad strokes here). However, I think the ideas of Plato are interesting because of the tripartite idea of Logos, Eros, and Thumos. Mostly, I think that Thumos[2] is a great way to look at things and categorize issues that we feel. Quickly: > Thumos: a Greek word expressing the concept of "spiritedness" (as in "spirited stallion" or "spirited debate"). The word indicates a physical association with breath or blood and is also used to express the human desire for recognition. [2] Thumos is neither good nor evil, but is something that can get away from you and needs to be controlled (by the Logos). For example: Achilles was overly thumotic and was thus killed by his desire for glory, blood, and honor; all thumotic traits. However, it was the thumos of Achilles drove him to be such a great warrior that we remember to this day. Also, the author Jack London was a thumotic person. He was always moving about, getting into scraps, trying to improve his writing, becoming famous. But that desire for greatness is what killed him as he literally worked himself to an early death while writing. So, the energy that we have as men can be seen in this tripartite way of Logos, Eros, and Thumos, not just destructive or constructive. Having outlets that are 'base' (Eros) are as needed as having outlets that are 'spirited/honorable' (Thumos) and 'intellectual'(Logos). [0] https://www.artofmanliness.com/articles/what-is-a-man-the-allegory-of-the-chariot/ https://www.artofmanliness.com/articles/what-is-a-man-the-al... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariot_Allegory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariot_Allegory [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thumos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thumos
- johnchristopher 7y ago

johnchristopher 7y ago

While I agree I want to add, for the sake of the conversation only, that it somehow paints a picture of men as beasts to be tamed (by work, by enrolling, etc.).

SmellyGeekBoy 7y ago
Humans are animals after all, no matter how highly we think of ourselves.
- mettamage 7y ago
  We are indeed. But I'd argue that some animals are more civilized than you think. Primal behavior is simply partially out of ignorance (that's how it seems to me). Humans are relatively unique in: 1. Language 2. Tool use (thanks to being land-dwellers, two legged, and having opposable thumbs) 3. Having a prefrontal cortex that allows us to inhibit any other instinct we have Other animals have this as well to some degree or another, even all 3 of them. These 3 things combined allow us to sometimes escape our primal nature. But I wonder whether we're alone in that: how about dolphins, elephants and other animals of that sort?
  - nicoburns 7y ago
    I find that out capacity to override behaviours using our prefrontal cortex is strongly affected by the extent to which our base needs are met. Obvious example: hangry people. I think social exclusion is another case where people's base needs aren't being met.
    - mettamage 7y ago
      Fair point, our prefrontal cortices do not have that much power on their own without such conditions being met.
- woodruffw 7y ago
  Humans are also 65% oxygen by mass, but most of us don't think that we're at our best when we combust. Our animal reality constrains the ways in which we can behave, but says nothing about how we ought to behave within that realm of possibility.
FussyZeus 7y ago
I see this as a side effect of the ideals toxic masculinity puts forth. I was under that for a long time and I'm still learning through therapy how to express myself properly, because it was simply drilled into me that men don't express feelings besides rage, that anything else you feel is "weakness," that it's important to remain stoic and focused in all situations, etc. I mean yeah it makes you really valuable in certain situations but it also makes your daily life hell.
- EGreg 7y ago
  I disagree with the idea of toxic masculinity because, as presented, it seems to have been abused (or, in hacker parlance, overloaded). Can you name a few uniquely or predominantly masculine traits which would NOT be called toxic masculinity by someone prominent?
  - stefco_ 7y ago
    Not GP, but: I think it's a useful phrase, though it's often overloaded/misapplied/used vaguely. Some (generally recognized as) non-toxic stereotypically masculine traits include having confidence, a can-do attitude, being protective, trying to be helpful, being intellectual, being silly, leading people towards common goals. Even anger in moderation is not inherently toxic (we all feel it). These things can all be terrible in excess, of course, so I think sometimes people fairly call an excess of these things toxic (even if the trait itself is great in moderation). It's also bad if you are only allowed to embody a specific set of traits and behaviors; clearly men should not be limited to these traits (though the societal pressures to conform to traits like these are strong and are often what are referred to as "toxic masculinity" in reasonable discourse). Likewise, women should clearly be seen as equally capable of possessing these stereotypically masculine traits. I think a lot of the use of "toxic masculinity" is in reference to the fact that men are often strongly discouraged, explicitly and implicitly, from doing things that are seen as non-masculine. This causes behavior that's harmful to oneself and others, like taking out all your emotions as anger, or feeling like violence is the most powerful and respected way to make an impact. In more benign forms, it can come from an excess of an otherwise good trait, like going from confident to cocky. Many people will use the term vaguely/badly, but I think the usage I just described is useful. I think the most important point is that "toxic masculinity" (in its useful and precise form) is very different from saying "men are toxic". It's closer to "men face toxic pressure due to people's gender expectations that cause them to suffer and sometimes hurt others as well". It's about the societal pressure to conform to a narrow and inadequate spectrum of behaviors. It's like men are expected to span a 3D emotional space with only 1 emotional "basis vector" since the other 2 are effeminate. The 1 basis vector is not itself "toxic"; it's the denial of the other 2 vectors.
rpmisms 7y ago
That's not a pleasant turn of phrase, but how inaccurate is it? We've all been angsty balls of testosterone at some point in our lives, and focusing that energy is the only thing that helps. Talking about feelings isn't always what's needed. Sometimes you have to get out there and break/make something.
- jcims 7y ago
  What’s the saying? Idle hands clear the path to enlightenment? Uhhh. From idle hands idyl lands?
  - type0 7y ago
    And ultimately this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faust,_Part_Two#Act_V https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faust,_Part_Two#Act_V

Balgair 7y ago

>I have energy, destructive or constructive. Plato talked about this in Phaedrus about the allegory of the Chariot [0,1]. I think it's a useful lens to view the desires we humans have, though not a perfect lens: >First the charioteer of the human soul drives a pair, and secondly one of the horses is noble and of noble breed, but the other quite the opposite in breed and character. Therefore in our case the driving is necessarily difficult and troublesome. The Charioteer represents intellect, reason, or the part of the soul that must guide the soul to truth; one horse represents rational or moral impulse or the positive part of passionate nature (e.g., righteous indignation); while the other represents the soul's irrational passions, appetites, or concupiscent nature. The Charioteer directs the entire chariot/soul, trying to stop the horses from going different ways, and to proceed towards enlightenment. In the modern west, we have an idea of 'Pious vs. Evil' that each of us tries to balance (super broad strokes here). However, I think the ideas of Plato are interesting because of the tripartite idea of Logos, Eros, and Thumos. Mostly, I think that Thumos[2] is a great way to look at things and categorize issues that we feel. Quickly: > Thumos: a Greek word expressing the concept of "spiritedness" (as in "spirited stallion" or "spirited debate"). The word indicates a physical association with breath or blood and is also used to express the human desire for recognition. [2] Thumos is neither good nor evil, but is something that can get away from you and needs to be controlled (by the Logos). For example: Achilles was overly thumotic and was thus killed by his desire for glory, blood, and honor; all thumotic traits. However, it was the thumos of Achilles drove him to be such a great warrior that we remember to this day. Also, the author Jack London was a thumotic person. He was always moving about, getting into scraps, trying to improve his writing, becoming famous. But that desire for greatness is what killed him as he literally worked himself to an early death while writing. So, the energy that we have as men can be seen in this tripartite way of Logos, Eros, and Thumos, not just destructive or constructive. Having outlets that are 'base' (Eros) are as needed as having outlets that are 'spirited/honorable' (Thumos) and 'intellectual'(Logos). [0] https://www.artofmanliness.com/articles/what-is-a-man-the-allegory-of-the-chariot/ https://www.artofmanliness.com/articles/what-is-a-man-the-al... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariot_Allegory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariot_Allegory [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thumos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thumos

johnchristopher 7y ago