5 ms·

> It’s time to open the floodgates. Time for men to give up emulating the stone-faced heroes of action movies and be more like the emotive heroes of Homer, like

by screye 7y ago

> It’s time to open the floodgates. Time for men to give up emulating the stone-faced heroes of action movies and be more like the emotive heroes of Homer, like the weeping kings, saints and statesmen of thousands of years of human history. I fully support the premise, but it clearly ignores the reality. A man has to first be convinced that the environment around him will not reject him for crying, before expecting him to be vulnerable in such an unfamiliar way. Will a crying man be deemed as someone unsuitable for being the emotional pillar in a relationship ? Will a crying man be seen as someone who can't deal with crisis ? Will a crying man be seen to be a child ? No matter how much we tell someone it is alright, they won't believe it to be true until the environment shows it to be so. People talk about toxic masculinity as though it is a problem created only by men. But, the idea of it pervades throughout society. Affecting children, women and men alike. Men can't be the only ones battling it. A comment pointed towards Khamenei crying at Soleimani's funeral as a sign towards encouraging men to cry. However, I only see it as an example for the contrary. Crying for men carries a weight, that implies that it must be reserved for an occasion special enough to warrant it. Had men crying at the death of their closest friend been customary, then Khamenei's voice cracking at the funeral would have never been reported as a special observation.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
> I fully support the premise, but it clearly ignores the reality. A man has to first be convinced that the environment around him will not reject him for crying, before expecting him to be vulnerable in such an unfamiliar way. I dunno, I guess my conception of manliness is different because I think what makes "manly weeping" different from conventional weeping is precisely that emotion has so moved a man as to make social consequences irrelevant.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
bluntfang 7y ago
> Men can't be the only ones battling it. Literally everyone else but men are battling it, and very publicly. #metoo is a great example.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
IfOnlyYouKnew 7y ago
There have been quite a few crying men that became iconic: Mandela, I seem to remember, and also Helmuth Kohl (and, simlar: Willy Brandt on hus knees). Didn't Obama cry at one of the many church services for victims of gun violence? And I don't believe these instances derive their power from stigma. None of these people became less respected. In fact I don't remember any man hurt by crying. The closest is probably Boehner (former Speaker of the House). It was actually his shtick and he would cry at two or three events every week, but the worst he got for that was some mild and sympathetic mocking by Jon Stewart. And if you want to enlist women in your fight for the right to cry, I don't quite know what you expect from them? It seems they already care rather little about performative manliness, as evidenced by the growing partisan voting gap.
- scarmig 7y ago
  It's the difference between weeping "at a distance" versus weeping out of emotion. All the situations you mention involve a man weeping at some tragic part of the world, which I agree is broadly accepted. Same applies to, e.g., crying at a sad movie. However, it ignores the reality that the most important kind of weeping isn't where you weep because you're recognizing something is socially coded as sad, but where you weep because you're feeling sad. Maybe you lost a job; maybe you feel like a failure; maybe you got your heart broken. And for all of these there's a substantial stigma, in that to be a Real Man(tm) you are forced to embrace your agency and act instead of feel. A single controlled, manly tear is celebrated; messy weeping is deeply stigmatized, and many women would consider a man who does so weak and unsuitable for a relationship.
  - setr 7y ago
    I like to describe as when a real man cries, he does it alone, in a dark, empty room.
- TheOperator 7y ago
  The thing is you're speaking entirely about men of influence. I would have a heck of a time finding the citation but I recall one study where subjects were shown one of two people. The general idea of it was that one of the subjects was shown to get better answers on a test and generally was more successful. The other was a neer-do-well. Then both of these subjects tripped. The neer-do-well who tripped was judged even more negatively. The achiever was judged more positively. Almost as if the mistake had "humanized" them. I also notice that when people talk about men who are in touch with their feminine side, and open about things like being sexually assaulted, we see Terry Crews types who are built like a brick shithouse and are oozing with exaggerated masculinity and success. Can man who is already judged as weak and effeminette get away wiht crying and be treated well? I don't think that's the case and in fact I think the reverse is true. If a woman in the military trying to make a name for herself bursts into tears regularly will she be seen as strong enough to not break down in the midst of battle? On top of that point... I think you're missing that the crying in all the cases you're talking about is quite controlled. To the point of Jibes about both Boehner and Obama playing up the waterworks to drive sympathy. Neither of these men are sobbing "I can't do this job... I'm not good enough". They're sobbing at some vague distant injustice to show how much they care about something. So I'm not even sure these examples demonstrate that crying is culturally accepted... and instead they merely show that specific circumstances allow for crying (high-status man, tragedy not caused by yourself, etc) >Mandela I think old men get an exception from cultural expectations around crying and i'm not sure why.
wavefunction 7y ago
I cried in public one time while discussing my dead brother with my mom. It was a foreign country as well so who knows what people were thinking. Would do it again!
downerending 7y ago
In my experience, women react very negatively to my tears. (And as for "toxic masculinity", wouldn't this be better described as "toxic femininity"?)
- krapp 7y ago
  >(And as for "toxic masculinity", wouldn't this be better described as "toxic femininity"?) No. It's modern masculine culture that doesn't allow men to express their emotions for fear of appearing weak or "beta." The toxicity derives from that pathological aspect of masculine culture. Women doing what men do and reinforcing this toxic aspect of masculine culture are also engaging in toxic masculinity.
  - signalremotefac 7y ago
    The point the person is trying to make is describing masculine behaviours as toxic, by simply prefixing toxic, is an example of what they are describing. Thus, it is really a toxic attidude towards masculinity and those that are male. You are even trying to describe women that "adopt" these behaviours as being bad for being more male. Thus, guilty and worthless. As if they are not A True Woman.
    - krapp 7y ago
      >The point the person is trying to make is describing masculine behaviours as toxic, by simply prefixing toxic, is an example of what you are describing. No, that's not what toxic masculinity describes. But I've been down this rabbithole before on HN, and I'm not going to waste time trying to convince you otherwise. >You are even trying to describe women that "adopt" these behaviours as being bad for being more male. Thus, guilty and worthless. As if they are not A True Woman. That's not even a remotely charitable or accurate interpretation of my comment. Good day sir.
      - signalremotefac 7y ago
        People do not have to agree to your bad use of the English language. The term "toxic masculinity" is a creepy academic "theory" it is not an accepted truth. I think it is one of the most negative and nasty social mores of those that you are desperate to be apart of. There is nothing that turns me off more. Ps. You are assuming I am a man? How woke.
jmcqk6 7y ago
> Will a crying man be deemed as someone unsuitable for being the emotional pillar in a relationship ? > Will a crying man be seen as someone who can't deal with crisis ? > Will a crying man be seen to be a child ? When faced with questions like these, I'm reminded of Richard Feynman and the question "What do you care what other people think?" It seems we've reached a point where we allow our insecurities drive our actions more than anything else. The problem is that we do not deal with our insecurities at all - they aren't even seen as a problem to fix, but something we just live with. They are not tested, because the risks are deemed too great. Some of the greatest things in life come from damning those insecurities and just fucking doing [X].
- screye 7y ago
  This is a thought I've gone through the motions of many times. I have gone from caring -> not caring -> to realizing that the ability to care or not is not in my hands at all. You cannot run from nature. Humans are social animals. Everything we do is informed by society. There is no 'you' in isolation from society. As technical/math oriented people, it is very tempting to derive humanity from 1st principles like a derivation or posing our decision making process as a controlled trial. However, I find that to be a fallacy. Often, people who claim to not care, merely turn a blind eye to the influence of things they care about, and ironically end up being most strongly influenced by them. An insecurity is like a squatter in your house. You can claim to not care but that only give it more licence to destroy. The real way to deal with the squatter is to be fully cognizant of it and take deliberate steps to kick the squatter out. That is a lot of caring, yet is the best way to deal with the insecurity.
  - jmcqk6 7y ago
    Yeah, addressing the insecurity does take care, and I did not mean to suggest that one should not care about their insecurities. They are things to work on and make better, not things to just live with. The biggest problem with something like "what do you care what other people think" is that we want to read it in an absolutest manner. But that's not how it should be read. The question should be used as part of addressing the insecurity. Do you really need to care in this instance? A healthy friendship means caring about what the other person thinks. I imagine marriage makes that even more important. Caring about what some rando might think if he sees me crying? That's not important. A key thing is being mindful and purposeful about it instead of just letting whatever your current view of society is dictate your actions.
TheOperator 7y ago
>I fully support the premise, but it clearly ignores the reality. A man has to first be convinced that the environment around him will not reject him for crying, before expecting him to be vulnerable in such an unfamiliar way. It's irritating to read recommendations for people to effectively martyr themselves in the sake of progress. >People talk about toxic masculinity as though it is a problem created only by men. "Toxic masculinity" is an unfortunately named term that leads to a lot of people talking past eachother since what the term means academically, and what it means colloqually/what it implies are fairly different. I think the issue is intractable enough to justify doing away with the term entirely and eventually coming up with a euphemism that means the same thing.

by screye 7y ago

AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago

> I fully support the premise, but it clearly ignores the reality. A man has to first be convinced that the environment around him will not reject him for crying, before expecting him to be vulnerable in such an unfamiliar way. I dunno, I guess my conception of manliness is different because I think what makes "manly weeping" different from conventional weeping is precisely that emotion has so moved a man as to make social consequences irrelevant.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

bluntfang 7y ago

> Men can't be the only ones battling it. Literally everyone else but men are battling it, and very publicly. #metoo is a great example.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

IfOnlyYouKnew 7y ago

There have been quite a few crying men that became iconic: Mandela, I seem to remember, and also Helmuth Kohl (and, simlar: Willy Brandt on hus knees). Didn't Obama cry at one of the many church services for victims of gun violence? And I don't believe these instances derive their power from stigma. None of these people became less respected. In fact I don't remember any man hurt by crying. The closest is probably Boehner (former Speaker of the House). It was actually his shtick and he would cry at two or three events every week, but the worst he got for that was some mild and sympathetic mocking by Jon Stewart. And if you want to enlist women in your fight for the right to cry, I don't quite know what you expect from them? It seems they already care rather little about performative manliness, as evidenced by the growing partisan voting gap.

scarmig 7y ago
It's the difference between weeping "at a distance" versus weeping out of emotion. All the situations you mention involve a man weeping at some tragic part of the world, which I agree is broadly accepted. Same applies to, e.g., crying at a sad movie. However, it ignores the reality that the most important kind of weeping isn't where you weep because you're recognizing something is socially coded as sad, but where you weep because you're feeling sad. Maybe you lost a job; maybe you feel like a failure; maybe you got your heart broken. And for all of these there's a substantial stigma, in that to be a Real Man(tm) you are forced to embrace your agency and act instead of feel. A single controlled, manly tear is celebrated; messy weeping is deeply stigmatized, and many women would consider a man who does so weak and unsuitable for a relationship.
- setr 7y ago
  I like to describe as when a real man cries, he does it alone, in a dark, empty room.
TheOperator 7y ago
The thing is you're speaking entirely about men of influence. I would have a heck of a time finding the citation but I recall one study where subjects were shown one of two people. The general idea of it was that one of the subjects was shown to get better answers on a test and generally was more successful. The other was a neer-do-well. Then both of these subjects tripped. The neer-do-well who tripped was judged even more negatively. The achiever was judged more positively. Almost as if the mistake had "humanized" them. I also notice that when people talk about men who are in touch with their feminine side, and open about things like being sexually assaulted, we see Terry Crews types who are built like a brick shithouse and are oozing with exaggerated masculinity and success. Can man who is already judged as weak and effeminette get away wiht crying and be treated well? I don't think that's the case and in fact I think the reverse is true. If a woman in the military trying to make a name for herself bursts into tears regularly will she be seen as strong enough to not break down in the midst of battle? On top of that point... I think you're missing that the crying in all the cases you're talking about is quite controlled. To the point of Jibes about both Boehner and Obama playing up the waterworks to drive sympathy. Neither of these men are sobbing "I can't do this job... I'm not good enough". They're sobbing at some vague distant injustice to show how much they care about something. So I'm not even sure these examples demonstrate that crying is culturally accepted... and instead they merely show that specific circumstances allow for crying (high-status man, tragedy not caused by yourself, etc) >Mandela I think old men get an exception from cultural expectations around crying and i'm not sure why.

wavefunction 7y ago

I cried in public one time while discussing my dead brother with my mom. It was a foreign country as well so who knows what people were thinking. Would do it again!

downerending 7y ago

In my experience, women react very negatively to my tears. (And as for "toxic masculinity", wouldn't this be better described as "toxic femininity"?)

krapp 7y ago
>(And as for "toxic masculinity", wouldn't this be better described as "toxic femininity"?) No. It's modern masculine culture that doesn't allow men to express their emotions for fear of appearing weak or "beta." The toxicity derives from that pathological aspect of masculine culture. Women doing what men do and reinforcing this toxic aspect of masculine culture are also engaging in toxic masculinity.
- signalremotefac 7y ago
  The point the person is trying to make is describing masculine behaviours as toxic, by simply prefixing toxic, is an example of what they are describing. Thus, it is really a toxic attidude towards masculinity and those that are male. You are even trying to describe women that "adopt" these behaviours as being bad for being more male. Thus, guilty and worthless. As if they are not A True Woman.
  - krapp 7y ago
    >The point the person is trying to make is describing masculine behaviours as toxic, by simply prefixing toxic, is an example of what you are describing. No, that's not what toxic masculinity describes. But I've been down this rabbithole before on HN, and I'm not going to waste time trying to convince you otherwise. >You are even trying to describe women that "adopt" these behaviours as being bad for being more male. Thus, guilty and worthless. As if they are not A True Woman. That's not even a remotely charitable or accurate interpretation of my comment. Good day sir.
    - signalremotefac 7y ago
      People do not have to agree to your bad use of the English language. The term "toxic masculinity" is a creepy academic "theory" it is not an accepted truth. I think it is one of the most negative and nasty social mores of those that you are desperate to be apart of. There is nothing that turns me off more. Ps. You are assuming I am a man? How woke.

jmcqk6 7y ago

> Will a crying man be deemed as someone unsuitable for being the emotional pillar in a relationship ? > Will a crying man be seen as someone who can't deal with crisis ? > Will a crying man be seen to be a child ? When faced with questions like these, I'm reminded of Richard Feynman and the question "What do you care what other people think?" It seems we've reached a point where we allow our insecurities drive our actions more than anything else. The problem is that we do not deal with our insecurities at all - they aren't even seen as a problem to fix, but something we just live with. They are not tested, because the risks are deemed too great. Some of the greatest things in life come from damning those insecurities and just fucking doing [X].

screye 7y ago
This is a thought I've gone through the motions of many times. I have gone from caring -> not caring -> to realizing that the ability to care or not is not in my hands at all. You cannot run from nature. Humans are social animals. Everything we do is informed by society. There is no 'you' in isolation from society. As technical/math oriented people, it is very tempting to derive humanity from 1st principles like a derivation or posing our decision making process as a controlled trial. However, I find that to be a fallacy. Often, people who claim to not care, merely turn a blind eye to the influence of things they care about, and ironically end up being most strongly influenced by them. An insecurity is like a squatter in your house. You can claim to not care but that only give it more licence to destroy. The real way to deal with the squatter is to be fully cognizant of it and take deliberate steps to kick the squatter out. That is a lot of caring, yet is the best way to deal with the insecurity.
- jmcqk6 7y ago
  Yeah, addressing the insecurity does take care, and I did not mean to suggest that one should not care about their insecurities. They are things to work on and make better, not things to just live with. The biggest problem with something like "what do you care what other people think" is that we want to read it in an absolutest manner. But that's not how it should be read. The question should be used as part of addressing the insecurity. Do you really need to care in this instance? A healthy friendship means caring about what the other person thinks. I imagine marriage makes that even more important. Caring about what some rando might think if he sees me crying? That's not important. A key thing is being mindful and purposeful about it instead of just letting whatever your current view of society is dictate your actions.

TheOperator 7y ago

>I fully support the premise, but it clearly ignores the reality. A man has to first be convinced that the environment around him will not reject him for crying, before expecting him to be vulnerable in such an unfamiliar way. It's irritating to read recommendations for people to effectively martyr themselves in the sake of progress. >People talk about toxic masculinity as though it is a problem created only by men. "Toxic masculinity" is an unfortunately named term that leads to a lot of people talking past eachother since what the term means academically, and what it means colloqually/what it implies are fairly different. I think the issue is intractable enough to justify doing away with the term entirely and eventually coming up with a euphemism that means the same thing.