4 ms·

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

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...
- snagglegaggle 7y ago
  Ok -- if masculinity is irrelevant, which is what I am claiming and what you say the APA guidance also claims, then why do they spend so much time on it? They don't dismiss it, just speak to different types of masculinity. What is the intended interpretation of your sources? It seems like you just put some random links up. They don't seem to link the creation of toxic masculinity to any movement.
  - krapp 7y ago
    >Ok -- if masculinity is irrelevant, which is what I am claiming and what you say the APA guidance also claims, then why do they spend so much time on it? They don't dismiss it, just speak to different types of masculinity. They don't claim that it's irrelevant, nor do I, so we disagree there, and we also disagree that the space given to it is out of proportion to its relevance. They merely don't consider it pathological, and most of the guidelines don't appear to be about masculinity per se, at all. > It seems like you just put some random links up. They don't seem to link the creation of toxic masculinity to any movement. From Wikipedia: "The term toxic masculinity originated in the mythopoetic men's movement of the 1980s and 1990s.[1]" [1]https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/02/toxic-masculinity-history/583411/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/02/toxic-mas... From the Atlantic: "Despite the term’s recent popularity among feminists, toxic masculinity did not originate with the women’s movement. It was coined in the mythopoetic men’s movement of the 1980s and ’90s, motivated in part as a reaction to second-wave feminism." From the book of man: "The phrase can be traced back to a guy called, brilliantly, Shepherd Bliss, who was one of the leaders of the Mythopoetic Men’s Movement activist which sprang up in the 80s, and aimed to remythologise men: essentially remove the limited archetypes like “warrior and king” and end biological determinism and hierarchical thinking. Bliss wrote about a return to preindustrial cooperative masculinity, all raising barns and making fires, rather than competitive technological masculinity." The goodmen project page doesn't make the links the others do, but it does describe the concept as existing as far back as the Victorian era. One can make a reasonable inference from there.

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...

snagglegaggle 7y ago
Ok -- if masculinity is irrelevant, which is what I am claiming and what you say the APA guidance also claims, then why do they spend so much time on it? They don't dismiss it, just speak to different types of masculinity. What is the intended interpretation of your sources? It seems like you just put some random links up. They don't seem to link the creation of toxic masculinity to any movement.
- krapp 7y ago
  >Ok -- if masculinity is irrelevant, which is what I am claiming and what you say the APA guidance also claims, then why do they spend so much time on it? They don't dismiss it, just speak to different types of masculinity. They don't claim that it's irrelevant, nor do I, so we disagree there, and we also disagree that the space given to it is out of proportion to its relevance. They merely don't consider it pathological, and most of the guidelines don't appear to be about masculinity per se, at all. > It seems like you just put some random links up. They don't seem to link the creation of toxic masculinity to any movement. From Wikipedia: "The term toxic masculinity originated in the mythopoetic men's movement of the 1980s and 1990s.[1]" [1]https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/02/toxic-masculinity-history/583411/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/02/toxic-mas... From the Atlantic: "Despite the term’s recent popularity among feminists, toxic masculinity did not originate with the women’s movement. It was coined in the mythopoetic men’s movement of the 1980s and ’90s, motivated in part as a reaction to second-wave feminism." From the book of man: "The phrase can be traced back to a guy called, brilliantly, Shepherd Bliss, who was one of the leaders of the Mythopoetic Men’s Movement activist which sprang up in the 80s, and aimed to remythologise men: essentially remove the limited archetypes like “warrior and king” and end biological determinism and hierarchical thinking. Bliss wrote about a return to preindustrial cooperative masculinity, all raising barns and making fires, rather than competitive technological masculinity." The goodmen project page doesn't make the links the others do, but it does describe the concept as existing as far back as the Victorian era. One can make a reasonable inference from there.