5 ms·

Society has many (new?) structural problems dealing with men's issues. A lot of it is sexism favoring women, but a lot of it is a lack of desire to understand t

Society has many (new?) structural problems dealing with men's issues. A lot of it is sexism favoring women, but a lot of it is a lack of desire to understand the issues facing men and address them. To get an idea how bad it can be check out the APA's guidelines on treating men.[0] I think at the root of this is just a poor economy. Many of these issues about uselessness or loneliness would be solved by a job and a significant other. But no one's just going to start handing out well paying jobs and girlfriends. [0] https://www.apa.org/about/policy/boys-men-practice-guidelines.pdf https://www.apa.org/about/policy/boys-men-practice-guideline...

krapp 7y ago
>To get an idea how bad it can be check out the APA's guidelines on treating men What is the problem with these guidelines? I didn't see anything particularly controversial or objectionable there, although I did just skim them.
- snagglegaggle 7y ago
  The gist of it (to me) is it focuses on issues that are the feminist conception of what is wrong with masculinity and it is overly focused on masculinity. Masculinity, or what women think masculinity is, is usually just a proxy for feeling included and wanted. It's fine to say you don't owe anyone anything or don't need to impress anyone -- but as a man, if you're not doing those things (even in a way which isn't "manly"), no one cares who you are. In my experience this leads to going to a therapist and being told you can be anything you want to be, but when you actually try to follow up and get help, no one wants to help you because you're a man. I can't get it to load on this connection so I can't provide direct citations. Most of what I found objectionable was in the first two pages or so.
  - krapp 7y ago
    >The gist of it (to me) is it focuses on issues that are the feminist conception of what is wrong with masculinity and it is overly focused on masculinity. I'm guessing you're making the common assumption that the "feminist conception of what is wrong with masculinity" is that masculinity itself is somehow harmful, which is a misinterpretation of the concept of what "toxic masculinity" is - a concept invented by the men's rights movement, and not feminists. The premise that masculinity could have negative aspects is at the core of common male "codes of conduct" like chivalry and gentlemanly behavior, traditionally enforced by men in order to police their own behavior (and, ironically, to enforce patriarchy.) And it's a premise that men didn't take issue with with until feminists agreed with them. If you interpret the concepts presented in the guidelines on their face rather than an anti-feminist bias then you would likely find that it isn't actually anti-male or even anti-masculine. Rather it mentions many of the issues that people often insist that society disregards relative to men, such as the life expectancy issue mentioned in the OP. > It's fine to say you don't owe anyone anything or don't need to impress anyone -- but as a man, if you're not doing those things, no one cares who you are. In other words... masculinity is an influential aspect of male identity, both personally and socially, and some aspects of the way masculinity is expressed can be harmful, just as any social, political or cultural complex (which masculinity is) can present both positive and negative effects. And it would be helpful for counselors and medical professionals to recognize this and know how to deal with it when necessary. This suggests to me that the conception of masculinity and what can go wrong with it (as opposed to "what is wrong with it", which again, suggests an often willful misunderstanding the concept) in the guidelines is correct, and that the focus presented on it by those guidelines is in proportion to its likely relevance. But as we seem to have come to radically different conclusions from this document, we may have to agree to disagree. I didn't read a sexist agenda or a callous disregard for men or men's issues from it, quite the opposite.
    - snagglegaggle 7y ago
      The issue is the focus on masculinity at all, let alone whatever toxic masculinity is.[0] The way psychological issues are linked to masculinity is disingenuous as the deeper cause of the issues isn't masculinity but the inability to self-actualize in whatever environment the man is in, and this is more closely related to how the worth of men is evaluated by society. This value can be attached to masculine qualities or not, it doesn't matter. So talking about masculinity and "subverting" it is pointless because as a man at the end of the day you are still left without opportunities or companionship because of how other people are evaluating you. [0] I only ever hear toxic masculinity brought up by feminists, can you really show it has some attachment to the men's rights movement?
      - krapp 7y ago
        >The way psychological issues are linked to masculinity is disingenuous as the deeper cause of the issues isn't masculinity but the inability to self-actualize in whatever environment the man is in The AMA guidelines don't link psychological issues to masculinity, nor are they considering masculinity to be a cause of any issues in and of itself. >So talking about masculinity and "subverting" it is pointless because as a man at the end of the day you are still left without opportunities or companionship because of how other people are evaluating you. Nowhere in the AMA guidelines is "subverting" masculinity discussed or considered, either. You're basing your opinions on a false assumption of what masculinity is assumed to be, and reading an agenda into the AMA guidelines that isn't there. >can you really show it has some attachment to the men's rights movement? It's literally mentioned in the Wikipedia article on the term[0], and a quick Google search brings up a few more references[1..3] although I'm guessing your use of the term "really" in italics is meant to leave wiggle room to deny whatever sources I present as being authoritative enough. So take the fact that, if you research the origin of both the term and the concept, you find links to the mens' rights movement and male culture, and no such sources claiming that the term was invented by feminists, as you will. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_masculinity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_masculinity [1]https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/02/toxic-masculinity-history/583411/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/02/toxic-mas... [2]https://thebookofman.com/mind/masculinity/what-is-toxic-masculinity/ https://thebookofman.com/mind/masculinity/what-is-toxic-masc... [3]https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/man-victorian-masculinity-sjbn/ https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/man-victorian-ma...
SuoDuanDao 7y ago
Andrew Yang's national dividend proposal would be the next best thing to handing out jobs, better in a lot of ways because it would free up some mindspace for the minority of men who do have entrepreneurial potential but not the freedom to pursue their vision.
- LegitShady 7y ago
  andrew yang's socialist pretend "dividend" that isnt from profit it just another grifter offering you someone else's tax dollars. It will fail abysmally or create an evil empire, like every other attempt at socialism. Both outcomes kill millions of people. Please stop pushing your political socialism as a solution to mens problems. It's no solution to anything. Its just political promises from someone who will never have to deliver.
  - SuoDuanDao 7y ago
    Resource constraints being a common precursor to suicide it's a bit strange to argue that a more redistributionist system wouldn't lower the suicide rate. I mentioned Yang specifically because that brand of redistributionism at least doesn't punish anyone who does get (or make) a job.
    - LegitShady 7y ago
      "The solution to suicide is socialism" doesn't ring more true when you try to obfuscate it by claiming "common precursors" etc you know won't pass basic inspection. Yang's redistribution is step 1. You elect the guy who gets the "reasonable" dole in place, and every election after that becomes about who can offer the most money to the people collecting. Yang is a snake oil salesman and has no solution. His solution is actually step 1 - create a situation where politics becomes about individually promising people money. What a disaster of a candidate. The only thing that at all makes me feel better is that he's going nowhere.
      - SuoDuanDao 7y ago

krapp 7y ago

>To get an idea how bad it can be check out the APA's guidelines on treating men What is the problem with these guidelines? I didn't see anything particularly controversial or objectionable there, although I did just skim them.

snagglegaggle 7y ago
The gist of it (to me) is it focuses on issues that are the feminist conception of what is wrong with masculinity and it is overly focused on masculinity. Masculinity, or what women think masculinity is, is usually just a proxy for feeling included and wanted. It's fine to say you don't owe anyone anything or don't need to impress anyone -- but as a man, if you're not doing those things (even in a way which isn't "manly"), no one cares who you are. In my experience this leads to going to a therapist and being told you can be anything you want to be, but when you actually try to follow up and get help, no one wants to help you because you're a man. I can't get it to load on this connection so I can't provide direct citations. Most of what I found objectionable was in the first two pages or so.
- krapp 7y ago
  >The gist of it (to me) is it focuses on issues that are the feminist conception of what is wrong with masculinity and it is overly focused on masculinity. I'm guessing you're making the common assumption that the "feminist conception of what is wrong with masculinity" is that masculinity itself is somehow harmful, which is a misinterpretation of the concept of what "toxic masculinity" is - a concept invented by the men's rights movement, and not feminists. The premise that masculinity could have negative aspects is at the core of common male "codes of conduct" like chivalry and gentlemanly behavior, traditionally enforced by men in order to police their own behavior (and, ironically, to enforce patriarchy.) And it's a premise that men didn't take issue with with until feminists agreed with them. If you interpret the concepts presented in the guidelines on their face rather than an anti-feminist bias then you would likely find that it isn't actually anti-male or even anti-masculine. Rather it mentions many of the issues that people often insist that society disregards relative to men, such as the life expectancy issue mentioned in the OP. > It's fine to say you don't owe anyone anything or don't need to impress anyone -- but as a man, if you're not doing those things, no one cares who you are. In other words... masculinity is an influential aspect of male identity, both personally and socially, and some aspects of the way masculinity is expressed can be harmful, just as any social, political or cultural complex (which masculinity is) can present both positive and negative effects. And it would be helpful for counselors and medical professionals to recognize this and know how to deal with it when necessary. This suggests to me that the conception of masculinity and what can go wrong with it (as opposed to "what is wrong with it", which again, suggests an often willful misunderstanding the concept) in the guidelines is correct, and that the focus presented on it by those guidelines is in proportion to its likely relevance. But as we seem to have come to radically different conclusions from this document, we may have to agree to disagree. I didn't read a sexist agenda or a callous disregard for men or men's issues from it, quite the opposite.
  - snagglegaggle 7y ago
    The issue is the focus on masculinity at all, let alone whatever toxic masculinity is.[0] The way psychological issues are linked to masculinity is disingenuous as the deeper cause of the issues isn't masculinity but the inability to self-actualize in whatever environment the man is in, and this is more closely related to how the worth of men is evaluated by society. This value can be attached to masculine qualities or not, it doesn't matter. So talking about masculinity and "subverting" it is pointless because as a man at the end of the day you are still left without opportunities or companionship because of how other people are evaluating you. [0] I only ever hear toxic masculinity brought up by feminists, can you really show it has some attachment to the men's rights movement?
    - krapp 7y ago
      >The way psychological issues are linked to masculinity is disingenuous as the deeper cause of the issues isn't masculinity but the inability to self-actualize in whatever environment the man is in The AMA guidelines don't link psychological issues to masculinity, nor are they considering masculinity to be a cause of any issues in and of itself. >So talking about masculinity and "subverting" it is pointless because as a man at the end of the day you are still left without opportunities or companionship because of how other people are evaluating you. Nowhere in the AMA guidelines is "subverting" masculinity discussed or considered, either. You're basing your opinions on a false assumption of what masculinity is assumed to be, and reading an agenda into the AMA guidelines that isn't there. >can you really show it has some attachment to the men's rights movement? It's literally mentioned in the Wikipedia article on the term[0], and a quick Google search brings up a few more references[1..3] although I'm guessing your use of the term "really" in italics is meant to leave wiggle room to deny whatever sources I present as being authoritative enough. So take the fact that, if you research the origin of both the term and the concept, you find links to the mens' rights movement and male culture, and no such sources claiming that the term was invented by feminists, as you will. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_masculinity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_masculinity [1]https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/02/toxic-masculinity-history/583411/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/02/toxic-mas... [2]https://thebookofman.com/mind/masculinity/what-is-toxic-masculinity/ https://thebookofman.com/mind/masculinity/what-is-toxic-masc... [3]https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/man-victorian-masculinity-sjbn/ https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/man-victorian-ma...

SuoDuanDao 7y ago

Andrew Yang's national dividend proposal would be the next best thing to handing out jobs, better in a lot of ways because it would free up some mindspace for the minority of men who do have entrepreneurial potential but not the freedom to pursue their vision.

LegitShady 7y ago
andrew yang's socialist pretend "dividend" that isnt from profit it just another grifter offering you someone else's tax dollars. It will fail abysmally or create an evil empire, like every other attempt at socialism. Both outcomes kill millions of people. Please stop pushing your political socialism as a solution to mens problems. It's no solution to anything. Its just political promises from someone who will never have to deliver.
- SuoDuanDao 7y ago
  Resource constraints being a common precursor to suicide it's a bit strange to argue that a more redistributionist system wouldn't lower the suicide rate. I mentioned Yang specifically because that brand of redistributionism at least doesn't punish anyone who does get (or make) a job.
  - LegitShady 7y ago
    "The solution to suicide is socialism" doesn't ring more true when you try to obfuscate it by claiming "common precursors" etc you know won't pass basic inspection. Yang's redistribution is step 1. You elect the guy who gets the "reasonable" dole in place, and every election after that becomes about who can offer the most money to the people collecting. Yang is a snake oil salesman and has no solution. His solution is actually step 1 - create a situation where politics becomes about individually promising people money. What a disaster of a candidate. The only thing that at all makes me feel better is that he's going nowhere.
    - SuoDuanDao 7y ago