10 ms·

Father of 4 here: I am too. For me the difficulty for a boy starts at school where today (and rightly so) boyish behaviour (fighting, being rough etc.) is not

• dlp211 6y ago
  What does physical violence have to do with the success of your son?
  • watwut 6y ago
    This will sound tongue in cheek, but presumably, if a boy is allowed to beat other boys, then he feels better about school. I had the "opportunity" to watch how fighting and being rough played out in class where my daughter was. There were like two boys who attacked other boys, verbally or physically. Majority of boys were unhappy about the situation, did not liked being insulted or pushed or being attacked. Their parents complained about issue, because their boys stopped liking going to school for that reason. I really don't think the solution should be "boys are boys and therefore more aggressive one should be allowed to attack other boys". That literally harms boys that done nothing wrong. The thing about "boys fighting among themselves" is that pretty often, it is not consensual, it is one boy attacking another.
    • xd 6y ago
      Sounds like they were bullying the other kids. I've never been a fan of violence but as a kid I loved playing rough, especially wrestling and these days enjoy a bit of a judo; but have zero desire to get into a pub brawl. When it comes to kids I think people confuse unwanted and mutual roughhousing.
      • watwut 6y ago
        Yes, it was bullying. To the school credit, they did not just ignored the issue. They did called in psychologists etc. The kids had some kind of program about relationships / how to deal with issues / listening to each other program. It slowly got better. Interestingly, the skills and attitudes they were teaching whole class were pretty much opposite of internet "fck the feelings, git gut looser, something bothering you is weakness" ethos.
        • damnencryption 6y ago
          Where do they teach you those skills on the internet?
          • watwut 6y ago
            I said "internet ethos" not "teach on internet".
  • jcims 6y ago
    Not OP but there was something centering about beating the shit out each other as kids. As long as you didn’t break anything or end up in the hospital it just was let be. I’m sure if we had a PS4 or sweet gaming rig and the Internet it would have been different, but we didn’t so... (Edit to watwut’s point this wasn’t bullying. We actually didn’t have a ton of that)
    • johnchristopher 6y ago
      > As long as you didn’t break anything or end up in the hospital it just was let be. You mean, as long as parents/adults/teachers don't notice it ? Breaking a tooth doesn't land you in the hospital, a pellet gun shot 5mm under the eye doesn't land you in the hospital, etc. (yeah, these are specific examples)
      • jcims 6y ago
        I was thinking more broken doors and flattened lampshades but body parts count too haha
        • johnchristopher 6y ago
          Yeah, no, seems like it teaches that anything goes as long as you don't get caught.
          • totony 6y ago
            I'm not sure about that, I remember, as a kid, being in a lot of altercations and I am pretty sure it hasn't affected me negatively. I'm not sure I agree with the new prerogative where anything physical = bad, so people turn to other mechanisms to cope with their emotions which may be worse long-term (e.g. bullying, mental abuse/insults, passive aggressiveness, etc.).
    • RhysU 6y ago
      People who frown on children tussling take their young dogs to the dog park so the dog can "play" with other dogs. Because the dog needs it but the kids do not.
  • elros 6y ago
    I can see a situation in which physical violence among boys, instead of being productively diffused (boys being explained this sort of behaviour is unacceptable, looking into environmental clues as to why that boy has that violent behaviour, while being given tools such as counselling, sports, martial arts, to deal with this violent energy and channel it into constructive focus), is treated as a "0 tolerance policy" type thing where the boy is removed from his class/school, moved to a different environment, socially ostracised, and starts believing that he's simply a violent person as a matter of fact, and that there's nothing he can do about it. Potentially being also put together with other kids in similar situations, which eventually reinforce each other, maybe fall into a rabbit hole of petty crimes, state/police interactions, early institutionalisation, and basically put in a never ending spiral which lead to a maladjusted adult in the best scenario, and a criminal in the worse one.
    • oblio 6y ago
      > boys being explained this sort of behaviour is unacceptable, looking into environmental clues as to why that boy has that violent behaviour, while being given tools such as counselling, sports, martial arts, to deal with this violent energy and channel it into constructive focus Isn't this a family thing?
      • elros 6y ago
        Certainly it is, as well. Though only inasmuch as family is one of the building blocks of society. As they say, "it takes a village" to raise a child. Also, what to do when the family itself is part of the problem?
        • oblio 6y ago
          > Also, what to do when the family itself is part of the problem? In my experience, almost nothing saves you from that. Yes, there are exceptions, but that's why we call them exceptions.
          • sjg007 6y ago
  • redis_mlc 6y ago
    You've illustrated the point exactly. When boys play hard to discover the limits of their strength, balance and risk, often that is compared to how girls behave and is called violent, or Oppositional Defiance Disorder (ODD.) That results in punishment or expulsion for acting like a normal boy would have behaved 30 years ago. That sets back their education, causing a cycle of development problems. This is called the feminization of boys. An extreme example of this was recently when teensage boys in juvenile halls were injected with estrogen to "control" them: https://witnessla.com/new-lawsuit-tells-of-16-yr-old-boy-allegedly-forced-by-probation-officials-to-take-estrogen-as-medication-to-control-his-behavior/ https://witnessla.com/new-lawsuit-tells-of-16-yr-old-boy-all... Boys and men are being accused of "toxic masculinity" by academic (Marxist) feminists, where they really mean "being born as men." If you're more than 10 years older than your gf, you're labelled "creepy." It's an attempt to further seize power from men by discrediting them. So it's not just boys that should be concerned, it's all men in the West. If you're not aware of this, you really should find out more. It's a culture war against men that will not turn out well for Western society in the long run.
  • deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  • tehwebguy 6y ago
    Nothing, it’s just a go-to item for people that want to talk about the good old days. I think it’s effective because it’s an unexpected negative, like a clickbait headline: “Fighting is actually good for growing boys!” but the simple truth is that physically fighting with someone over a disagreement is a very bad habit to encourage.
    • ithkuil 6y ago
      Indeed. Modern society got rid of dueling to resolve disputes way before women were even allowed to vote. There is a trend that favours a more civil society and it has ties to the increased productivity of such a society as opposed to the increased effeminacy. In such a society eventually proved to offer more opportunities for women and this in turn improved the productivity of the whole society. So perhaps we're confusing cause and effect?
    • totony 6y ago
      >simple truth is that physically fighting with someone over a disagreement is a very bad habit to encourage. I'm not sure physical altercations are worse than the alternatives. I remember as a kid you would fight with your friend and next day be friends again. No big deal really. Would you rather have a fight or have insults/passive aggressiveness/social ostracization. I'm really not convinced mental pain is much better than physical pain.
      • tehwebguy 6y ago
        > I'm really not convinced mental pain is much better than physical pain. Yeah because it's a ridiculous conclusion you jumped to, where the only two options are violence vs "insults/passive aggressiveness/social ostracization". Those are not the only two options. Teach your kids to listen to, understand and communicate their feelings properly.
        • totony 6y ago
          I'm not sure this is a realistic expectation. Of course you want your kids to be perfect, but I have yet to see any parent succeed in such an endeavour. I don't even think most adults can handle their emotions well enough for what you're suggesting.
  • threwthrewaway 6y ago
    Throwaway! The credible threat of violence is useful and is certainly a skill to teach your sons. Personal anecdata! My wife messed around once. We had young children who needed a mom and a non-broken home. I calmly visited the home of the other man. I told him that if my wife divorced me that was her choice and I would not stand in their way. I told him that if my wife did not divorce me and he continued to see her then I would beat the hell out of him. I left. Things turned out well for my children, over 5 years later, in that their parents remain married because the other dude stopped speaking to my wife.
    • deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
• pvorb 6y ago
  Why are your daughters better off financially? This is against what I'd expect, so I'm truly curious.
  • deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  • CreepGin 6y ago
    Less lazy, more realistic, more willing to explore different opportunities. (At least that's the general case for women vs men in my family/friends circles)
    • myle 6y ago
      This comment would have been clearly very controversial with genders reversed. It may be even now quite controversial. I am not saying it should or shouldn't be controversial. Just an observation.
      • FreshFries 6y ago
        > Less lazy, more realistic, more willing to explore different opportunities. Fact is, this is 100% the case.
      • amanaplanacanal 6y ago
        I'm not sure why it should be controversial. They are talking about their individual children, whom they know, not about the male or female gender as a whole.
    • mrweasel 6y ago
      Better educated as well.
  • jokethrowaway 6y ago
    Men tend to score higher in disagreeableness which doesn't bode well with education. Women generally outperform men in school but not on the job market (albeit that's mainly due to the fact they used to work less hours overall because of pregnancy and older people - who had less female competition - get higher salaries). Men are generally more assertive and better at negotiating. Anti-bias training is teaching interviewers to ignore assertiveness and communication/persuasion skills, to look beyond that and hire shy individuals (which may be fine, unless you're hiring for a leadership / sales role). Interviews reward more people who did their homework over actual job experience, which again favour an academic mindset. "Fair pay scale" are getting more popular, which means your negotiating skills are less important in order to make money. The HR field and the sociology field are dominated by women who of course can push and convince companies about the best way to move forward in order to be "inclusive" and look good with the general public (oh and women control 80% of consumer spending). With hiring conditions levelling the playing fields and women natural better performance in school / academic tasks, it's easy for more women to do better. Do you remember the pay gap? Well, of course none of those numbers can be trusted because there are tons of variables and skills differences in skills - but if you look at women and men in their 20s, women already outperform men. Older men who faced less competition are still ahead. But it's not all about money. Men thrive when they get responsibility. The worsening economy, the crisis doesn't help with that. Women historically had a husband to shield them from this worries; even though that is changing there is still a prevalence of non working women relying on men. The demonisation of men and masculinity, the repression of men definitely played a role in the increasing number of suicides, which are mainly committed by men. I guess there is a case to be make that men depression could be the cause of mass shooting and / or radicalisation of young men in terrorist organisations (eg. ISIS, Antifa, etc). Soldiers dying in wars are primarily men. Men tend to pursue dangerous jobs, increasing their likelihood of dying. Divorces affect negatively primarily men. Tribunals believe women more (see Heard vs Depp for a mainstream recent case and listen to the last phone call they exchanged before divorcing in which Heard admit hitting Depp and doesn't mention any violence in her regards) when things go wrong or when someone decide to cry wolf. Hope this helps spread awareness.
• lostlogin 6y ago
  Do you mean traits rather than treats?
  • FreshFries 6y ago
    Thank you, I did.
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• kennethh 6y ago
  I agree with you that the whole society have changed the framing of what is right and wrong in a way that is beneficial for women. If one look at the news nearly all the victims are women and all the perpetrators menn. Earlier this was somewhat balanced that most of the success people on tv was men but these days there is gender parity or more women in these positions as experts/politicians. More single parent homes which in most cases means children living with their mother, means fewer male role models especially when in kindergarten and primary school is mostly women. This also affect the other children since the framing of the world is more "feminist" and children try to fit in as well as possible with other children.
  • henrypasta 6y ago
    Interesting. And what are your thoughts on the Markovian view of this? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=j8PxqgliIno https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=j8PxqgliIno
• perakojotgenije 6y ago
  As someone who grew up in the 80's as a nerd mostly playing video games and never took part in these stupid "boy things", I welcome this new world. I can't understand a world where it is normal to have a bar fights.
  • pythonlion 6y ago
    as someone with 3 sisters I also welcome reality. Just enroll your kids to judo or some other sports if competition is what they need. only point I find sane is that we need more male teachers but its more like a market problem assuming man can do this job well in case of high demand (good salary)
    • DarkWiiPlayer 6y ago
      > but its more like a market problem assuming man can do this job well in case of high demand (good salary) Now try replacing male teachers with female CEOs in that sentence and see what happens.
    • em-bee 6y ago
      it's not only a market problem. as one schools director told me in new zealand for example parents don't trust male teachers, and it's practically impossible to get a job there working with children as a man.
      • MattGaiser 6y ago
        Reading these comments, would you allow any of these men to be around you kids?
        • marakv2 6y ago
          Male teacher here. 37 ex amateur MMA fighter(5 fights), life time of martial arts training. I am one of the most sought out teachers for our kindergarten classes, I'm energetic, friendly and have excellent control of the classroom resulting in students being more interested in attending. I have an excellent record with the quiet and shy students, to the point where other teachers in our other schools are told to speak to me for advice. My history has very little bearing as a teacher, as I do not condone any forms of violence in the classroom. Creating blanket statements without knowledge, results in irrational fears.
• questionfor 6y ago
  I don’t have children, but am curious - wouldn’t signing boys up to some kind of martial art solve it? It’s a well structured aggression, good exercise and there would be hardly any space for any kind of bullying there
• throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  I'd like to ask for clarity if you would > Where I grew up with semi regular bar fights, Is that good or bad? > today every physical alteration involves the police ditto, is that good or bad?
  • 20after4 6y ago
    Involving the police is never good.
• bryanrasmussen 6y ago
  >This trend is visible all over society as well. Where I grew up with semi regular bar fights, today every physical alteration involves the police. ok, but given the studies showing that lead in the environment heightened aggression during the years when I was growing up and I suppose you too, those semi-regular bar fights might not have been that natural part of growing up a boy as we might otherwise suppose.
• vagrantJin 6y ago
  I can assure you that most of the world is not moving in that direction. Partly because its not useful, partly because some things are very difficult to change. Unlike most people, I want my daughter and nieces to be able to handle themselves physically and mentally tough to chew. But that job has been given to the state to decide how I should raise kids. The most concerning thing however, should be the danger of assuming everything will be alright.
• mosseater 6y ago
  There's this weird cultural/mental divide between "Masculine" meaning being rough and fighting and "Feminine" dealing with emotions and non-aggression. This this exactly the issue worrying me about my own son. These "Masculine" traits you talk about are toxic as heck. Getting into bar fights promotes an unhealthy mentality that spreads into other parts of your life. For example, if your okay with hitting other people at a bar, you might be more prone to abusing your children by using corporal punishment. I don't believe in toxic masculinity, but I do believe that there is a heck of a lot of toxic things men take into their identity. If you assimilate something into your identity, you no longer have the power to change that thing within yourself.
  • deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  • adenadel 6y ago
    I am not well-informed on this topic, but isn't men incorporating toxic things into their identity precisely what toxic masculinity is (i.e. to me it sounds like you do believe in toxic masculinity)? Please correct me if I'm wrong. I want to learn.
    • nayaketo 6y ago
      I've seen this term 'toxic masculinity' being used to describe anything from asserting yourself very firmly on discussion/debates to opening doors to your (female) partner. I'm not even sure what it means anymore.
    • djaque 6y ago
      Also certainly not an expert here, but here is a good definition I found: > Toxic masculinity is a narrow and repressive description of manhood, designating manhood as defined by violence, sex, status and aggression. It’s the cultural ideal of manliness, where strength is everything while emotions are a weakness; where sex and brutality are yardsticks by which men are measured, while supposedly “feminine” traits—which can range from emotional vulnerability to simply not being hypersexual—are the means by which your status as “man” can be taken away. It seems to be a catch all term for the problematic parts of the way men are idealized by society. IE stuff like how men can be expected to hide away their emotions or be perceived as weak. Stuff like that shows up in suicide statistics. Part of the problem with understanding the concept, IMO, is that ideological forces have managed to sway part of the public (or at least certain echo chambers) into believing that the people talking about it really mean "all men are bad" or "traditional masculinity is bad." I think there's something real here that needs to be addressed though. Edit: Case and point... somebody further down in this thread accused the term "toxic masculinity" of being designed by "academic Marxist feminists" who are waging culture wars in order to hyper-feminize small boys. [1] https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/the-difference-between-toxic-masculinity-and-being-a-man-dg/ https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/the-difference-b...
• monological 6y ago
  Social dominance hierarchies are evident in many animal species, including bonobos and humans. Displayed aggression in social settings, with and without physical altercation, serves as a way to establish said hierarchy. Ultimately, the function of hierarchy is to provide stability to the tribe, by organically placing you in a appropriate position to maximize the chance of the tribe's survival. There are clear biological differences between neurotypical human genders, such as endogenous Testosterone and Estrogen, giving rise to said behaviors. Conversely, the female's typical function in a tribe is to provide social cohesion, stability and pacification, and is driven primarily by hormones. This dynamical system generally operates in a very carefully balanced fashion. Thus, when humans intervene and introduce artificially made things like weaponized social networks that exploits and hijacks your dopaminergic system through likes or birth control pills that throws off your naturally occurring hormones and neurotransmitters, one could argue, just maybe, that it could have a potentially catastrophic long term effect on society. I guess what I'm saying is that I don't condone "bar fights", but there is both a biological and sociological reason for male aggression and the pendulum has swung quite far the other direction, demonizing it as "toxic masculinity". Just my 2 cents though...
  • sjg007 6y ago
    Yet we have these things called brains that can be used for introspection. The pen is mightier than the sword.
    • xupybd 6y ago
      Unfortunately our brains can't control our emotions as well as we'd like. Being purely rational isn't in the grasp of an human let alone children. If you want optimal outcomes for young people you must make tackle our biological predispositions when training young people.
      • sjg007 6y ago
        This is _why_ we go to school. I would advocate that school needs integrated therapy components too more than we have.
• sjg007 6y ago
  >in rather feminin ways (not so rightly) What do you mean by this?