8 ms·

I’ve thought about this a bit. I don’t have anger issues but I have anxiety issues and I spent decades not understanding that I experienced anxiety. In my ex

I’ve thought about this a bit. I don’t have anger issues but I have anxiety issues and I spent decades not understanding that I experienced anxiety. In my experience, the culture tells men to exhibit strength and show no weakness. What counts as strength/weakness has changed over time and varies depending on your social groups — it’s not just the stuff associated with typically masculine values, but it also shows up in coding skills, or parenting skills, or how much work one takes on in those or other domains without complaint. In Behave by Robert Sapolsky, it’s repeatedly observed that testosterone doesn’t necessarily amplify aggression, but it does drive status-seeking/maintaining behavior, where status is some set of collective values where one member can have more or less of it than another and be seen as above or below the other. To me, this maps very well to generalized sense of strength or weakness. So, in my opinion, men are both wired and trained by the culture to avoid admitting anxiety, to themselves and others, because it is a weakness.

plutonorm 7y ago
Yup. I had a serious anxiety condition since childhood. But my parents were so disgusted by my fear that they made me dissociate from it. I went to doctors and said something is wrong, they asked, what? And I could not answer because I could no longer feel my fear. I went for 30 years without knowing my problem. Society has a serious attitude problem towards men and it is seriously damaging a huge number of people.
- lazyasciiart 7y ago
  > Society has a serious attitude problem towards men and it is seriously damaging a huge number of people. As I understand it, this is what “toxic masculinity” is supposed to mean.
  - klipt 7y ago
    That just sounds like misandry. Society has an attitude problem with women in some respects too, but people just call it misogyny, not "toxic femininity" or whatever. Being consistent with terminology is sadly underrated.
    - justinjlynn 7y ago
      Indeed. If only "internalised misandry" and "misandry" were terms in common use, and the existence of which people didn't try to deny, we might able to see that sexism in society, no matter the source or target, is bad for, and has an impact on, everyone - and start addressing it honestly and without victim blaming.
    - habnds 7y ago
      in many ways isn't it two sides of the same coin?
    - mattlutze 7y ago
      Misandry is the state of being predisposed or prejudiced against men. Toxic masculinity is stereotypical or reductive modes of action or thinking perceived by men as expected or required, which can be harmful to other men or other people. They're not the same and it'd be not great to think that they are the same.
      - justinjlynn 7y ago
        True. Though misandry also includes the devaluing of certain ways a masculine identifying person might express that masculinity, just as misogyny also includes ways the devaluing of certain ways a feminine identifying person might express their femininity. Misandry is not simply the wholesale hatred of men and/or masculinity, just as misogyny is not simply the wholesale hatred of women and/or femininity. Toxic masculinity, as a term, encompasses behaviours which are driven by misogyny, misandry, and the, in masculine people, internalised misandry resulting in the perpetuation of mysogyny and misandrist attitudes. To see it as caused solely by internalised misandry is limiting. Such a view ignores the fact that toxic masculinity is a gestalt of behaviours driven by many different beliefs and attitudes - it ignores the fact that toxic masculinity is exhibited when mysogynistic or misandrisric behaviours are observed, and the observer is coerced by society to act in that manner thus perpetuating the cycle of sexism, internalised or not. If we want to address the syndrome we call toxic masculinity, we'll need to dissect it thoroughly. We'll need to name and target each component. As it is composed of behaviours resulting from all forms of sexism, we must address all those named forms of sexism in society from all applicable sources. Everyone in society contributes to toxic masculinity - but in different ways. Clearly a multifaceted approach is required - one in which we must all participate actively. Sexism is unacceptable and the mechanisms by which sexism perpetuates itself must be destroyed. Language is a very powerful weapon in that fight. We have a direct responsibility to use it effectively and with great precision. Let's carefully examine the words we use in this struggle to eliminate what we call toxic masculinity, because clearly there's some real confusion about what we're talking about here and some debate about who needs take action - because we all need to take action.
  - krapp 7y ago
    The only thing that toxic masculinity is supposed to mean is that there are aspects of traditional masculine norms which can manifest in harmful ways in modern society. For instance, men often have difficulty seeking help for mental or emotional health issues, because traditional masculine identity requires men to be stoic and independent of emotional connection - such needs are considered feminine, and a weakness when displayed in men. That would be an example of toxic masculinity. To continue from a now deleted reply - toxic masculinity is not internalized misandry. Misandry is a hatred of men. Toxic masculinity is not, nor does it derive from, a hatred of men. If one acknowledges that masculine identity and masculine culture exist, and that men have unique social, mental and emotional issues which derive in part from the expectations that society has of men, then one should be able to find the definition of toxic masculinity where these intersect, because the expectations that society has of men are defined, in large part, by men, themselves.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
      No, that's absolutely wrong. Men and women have strongly defined expectations of themselves and of each other. Some are social and cultural. Some are genetic. Many are contradictory - which leads to impossible demands that can't be achieved by either gender. All of the current models for dealing with this are wrong. Neither liberal feminism and identity politics nor alt-right resentment and nostalgia for an imaginary lost "real" masculinity are healthy solutions to this problem. Essentially, both approaches are resentment-based rather than reality-based. Some of the resentments are justified, others are rather artificially exaggerated. But I don't think either approach is the last or best word.
      - krapp 7y ago
        What impossible to achieve demands are being made in the definition of toxic masculinity? For reference, I'm using the definition from Wikipedia[0], since disagreeing on terms is a common problem in discussions like this. Interestingly, Wikipedia says the term and concept were invented by the men's movement, not resentful feminists. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_masculinity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_masculinity
- Udo 7y ago
  > Society has a serious attitude problem towards men and it is seriously damaging a huge number of people. On average, society has pretty serious attitudes/biases regarding both sexes. Men are seen as innately value-less, disposable, dangerous, free, and powerful, all at the same time. If you're a man, society does not care whether you live or die. Women are seen as having massive inherent value, in need of protection, harmless, unfree, weak, and limited, also all at the same time. If you're a woman, every decision about your life is seen as significant, sometimes to the degree that they don't trust you to make those decisions yourself. All of these suck.
schalab 7y ago
I dont think its a cultural thing. Men on average show less empathy and emotion than women. For obvious reasons, child rearing vs hunting. But most writers and journalists tend to be on the feminine side of the spectrum because that correlates with verbal ability. So this theory has emerged that most men are actually just as emotional as women but are hiding their feelings because society expects them to do it. Maybe a fringe of men who are all co-incidentally in persuasive fields in academia, entertainment and media exhibit this, but the average male may not.
- krapp 7y ago
  >But most writers and journalists tend to be on the feminine side of the spectrum because that correlates with verbal ability. Most writers and journalists have traditionally been men, because men have traditionally been considered more trustworthy and intelligent. The cultural stigma against female authorship has been strong enough that they have tended to either publish under male pseudonyms or neutral identities (such as J.K. Rowling) lest their feminine identity harm their earning potential.
  - TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
    Do you really think JK Rowling's gender has harmed her earning potential? She was outed - if that's the word - as a woman - almost as soon as the books began selling and no one seemed particularly bothered. It seems odd to pick a woman who is a billionaire as evidence of poor earning potential.
    - krapp 7y ago
      J.K. Rowling's publisher suggested she use those initials rather than her real name because it was believed that a fantasy authored by a woman would not be read by boys, and thus would have less earning potential[0]. Her success is evidence that the prejudice is unwarranted, and culturally waning, not that it doesn't exist, and certainly not that it never existed. And there's a long history of women authors publishing under male names for similar reasons, the Bronte sisters being famous examples[1,2]. Although obviously in their cases, the stigma against women authors was much worse than in modern times. Also, data shows that authorship still favors men considerably[3, 4], although women do sometimes dominate certain genres. [0]https://www.capitalfm.com/news/jk-rowling-full-name/ https://www.capitalfm.com/news/jk-rowling-full-name/ [1]https://theculturetrip.com/north-america/usa/articles/12-female-writers-who-wrote-under-male-pseudonyms/ https://theculturetrip.com/north-america/usa/articles/12-fem... [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Bront%C3%AB https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Bront%C3%AB [3]https://www.theguardian.com/books/2011/feb/04/research-male-writers-dominate-books-world https://www.theguardian.com/books/2011/feb/04/research-male-... [4]https://pudding.cool/2017/06/best-sellers/ https://pudding.cool/2017/06/best-sellers/

plutonorm 7y ago

Yup. I had a serious anxiety condition since childhood. But my parents were so disgusted by my fear that they made me dissociate from it. I went to doctors and said something is wrong, they asked, what? And I could not answer because I could no longer feel my fear. I went for 30 years without knowing my problem. Society has a serious attitude problem towards men and it is seriously damaging a huge number of people.

lazyasciiart 7y ago
> Society has a serious attitude problem towards men and it is seriously damaging a huge number of people. As I understand it, this is what “toxic masculinity” is supposed to mean.
- klipt 7y ago
  That just sounds like misandry. Society has an attitude problem with women in some respects too, but people just call it misogyny, not "toxic femininity" or whatever. Being consistent with terminology is sadly underrated.
  - justinjlynn 7y ago
    Indeed. If only "internalised misandry" and "misandry" were terms in common use, and the existence of which people didn't try to deny, we might able to see that sexism in society, no matter the source or target, is bad for, and has an impact on, everyone - and start addressing it honestly and without victim blaming.
  - habnds 7y ago
    in many ways isn't it two sides of the same coin?
  - mattlutze 7y ago
    Misandry is the state of being predisposed or prejudiced against men. Toxic masculinity is stereotypical or reductive modes of action or thinking perceived by men as expected or required, which can be harmful to other men or other people. They're not the same and it'd be not great to think that they are the same.
    - justinjlynn 7y ago
      True. Though misandry also includes the devaluing of certain ways a masculine identifying person might express that masculinity, just as misogyny also includes ways the devaluing of certain ways a feminine identifying person might express their femininity. Misandry is not simply the wholesale hatred of men and/or masculinity, just as misogyny is not simply the wholesale hatred of women and/or femininity. Toxic masculinity, as a term, encompasses behaviours which are driven by misogyny, misandry, and the, in masculine people, internalised misandry resulting in the perpetuation of mysogyny and misandrist attitudes. To see it as caused solely by internalised misandry is limiting. Such a view ignores the fact that toxic masculinity is a gestalt of behaviours driven by many different beliefs and attitudes - it ignores the fact that toxic masculinity is exhibited when mysogynistic or misandrisric behaviours are observed, and the observer is coerced by society to act in that manner thus perpetuating the cycle of sexism, internalised or not. If we want to address the syndrome we call toxic masculinity, we'll need to dissect it thoroughly. We'll need to name and target each component. As it is composed of behaviours resulting from all forms of sexism, we must address all those named forms of sexism in society from all applicable sources. Everyone in society contributes to toxic masculinity - but in different ways. Clearly a multifaceted approach is required - one in which we must all participate actively. Sexism is unacceptable and the mechanisms by which sexism perpetuates itself must be destroyed. Language is a very powerful weapon in that fight. We have a direct responsibility to use it effectively and with great precision. Let's carefully examine the words we use in this struggle to eliminate what we call toxic masculinity, because clearly there's some real confusion about what we're talking about here and some debate about who needs take action - because we all need to take action.
- krapp 7y ago
  The only thing that toxic masculinity is supposed to mean is that there are aspects of traditional masculine norms which can manifest in harmful ways in modern society. For instance, men often have difficulty seeking help for mental or emotional health issues, because traditional masculine identity requires men to be stoic and independent of emotional connection - such needs are considered feminine, and a weakness when displayed in men. That would be an example of toxic masculinity. To continue from a now deleted reply - toxic masculinity is not internalized misandry. Misandry is a hatred of men. Toxic masculinity is not, nor does it derive from, a hatred of men. If one acknowledges that masculine identity and masculine culture exist, and that men have unique social, mental and emotional issues which derive in part from the expectations that society has of men, then one should be able to find the definition of toxic masculinity where these intersect, because the expectations that society has of men are defined, in large part, by men, themselves.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
    No, that's absolutely wrong. Men and women have strongly defined expectations of themselves and of each other. Some are social and cultural. Some are genetic. Many are contradictory - which leads to impossible demands that can't be achieved by either gender. All of the current models for dealing with this are wrong. Neither liberal feminism and identity politics nor alt-right resentment and nostalgia for an imaginary lost "real" masculinity are healthy solutions to this problem. Essentially, both approaches are resentment-based rather than reality-based. Some of the resentments are justified, others are rather artificially exaggerated. But I don't think either approach is the last or best word.
    - krapp 7y ago
      What impossible to achieve demands are being made in the definition of toxic masculinity? For reference, I'm using the definition from Wikipedia[0], since disagreeing on terms is a common problem in discussions like this. Interestingly, Wikipedia says the term and concept were invented by the men's movement, not resentful feminists. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_masculinity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_masculinity
Udo 7y ago
> Society has a serious attitude problem towards men and it is seriously damaging a huge number of people. On average, society has pretty serious attitudes/biases regarding both sexes. Men are seen as innately value-less, disposable, dangerous, free, and powerful, all at the same time. If you're a man, society does not care whether you live or die. Women are seen as having massive inherent value, in need of protection, harmless, unfree, weak, and limited, also all at the same time. If you're a woman, every decision about your life is seen as significant, sometimes to the degree that they don't trust you to make those decisions yourself. All of these suck.

schalab 7y ago

I dont think its a cultural thing. Men on average show less empathy and emotion than women. For obvious reasons, child rearing vs hunting. But most writers and journalists tend to be on the feminine side of the spectrum because that correlates with verbal ability. So this theory has emerged that most men are actually just as emotional as women but are hiding their feelings because society expects them to do it. Maybe a fringe of men who are all co-incidentally in persuasive fields in academia, entertainment and media exhibit this, but the average male may not.

krapp 7y ago
>But most writers and journalists tend to be on the feminine side of the spectrum because that correlates with verbal ability. Most writers and journalists have traditionally been men, because men have traditionally been considered more trustworthy and intelligent. The cultural stigma against female authorship has been strong enough that they have tended to either publish under male pseudonyms or neutral identities (such as J.K. Rowling) lest their feminine identity harm their earning potential.
- TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
  Do you really think JK Rowling's gender has harmed her earning potential? She was outed - if that's the word - as a woman - almost as soon as the books began selling and no one seemed particularly bothered. It seems odd to pick a woman who is a billionaire as evidence of poor earning potential.
  - krapp 7y ago
    J.K. Rowling's publisher suggested she use those initials rather than her real name because it was believed that a fantasy authored by a woman would not be read by boys, and thus would have less earning potential[0]. Her success is evidence that the prejudice is unwarranted, and culturally waning, not that it doesn't exist, and certainly not that it never existed. And there's a long history of women authors publishing under male names for similar reasons, the Bronte sisters being famous examples[1,2]. Although obviously in their cases, the stigma against women authors was much worse than in modern times. Also, data shows that authorship still favors men considerably[3, 4], although women do sometimes dominate certain genres. [0]https://www.capitalfm.com/news/jk-rowling-full-name/ https://www.capitalfm.com/news/jk-rowling-full-name/ [1]https://theculturetrip.com/north-america/usa/articles/12-female-writers-who-wrote-under-male-pseudonyms/ https://theculturetrip.com/north-america/usa/articles/12-fem... [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Bront%C3%AB https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Bront%C3%AB [3]https://www.theguardian.com/books/2011/feb/04/research-male-writers-dominate-books-world https://www.theguardian.com/books/2011/feb/04/research-male-... [4]https://pudding.cool/2017/06/best-sellers/ https://pudding.cool/2017/06/best-sellers/