5 ms·

Can we have an example of toxic masculinity? I've never once received a real definition in a debate like this and when I'm close to it, the other side tries to

Can we have an example of toxic masculinity? I've never once received a real definition in a debate like this and when I'm close to it, the other side tries to make it sound like they are sympathetic to toxic masculinity. For example, I've had it told to me that I shouldnt have my son help me with changing my car's oil because thats putting some sort of burden on him at an early age. Does this sound like something a sane person would say? I would go as far to give the benefit of the doubt and say no, most people are sane and the ones that would make this type of argument are drawn into a social mania.

conception 3y ago
“Why are you crying?!? Real men don’t cry!”
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  Exactly this. But even worse, this is frequently not said aloud. It is implicit in all of our interactions. Express too much emotion outside of certain narrow contexts, and other people (men and women alike) will look at you like you are a wimp. Nobody has to say a word.
  - AlexandrB 3y ago
    I think it's worse than that. Traditional gender norms are perfectly ok with men expressing their emotions as long as those emotions are anger.
- snapplebobapple 3y ago
  That's just the crass version of the actually good advice that goes as follows: Don't react to your emotions, instead notice your emotions wash over you, identify the why and respond rationally instead of emotionally to the why. It's basically good advice given in the worst possible way with deceptive context
  - jmye 3y ago
    Why is that good advice? If my father dies, why is it bad to be sad about it? Why is it wrong to cry when I’m sad? I think you’re completely off base in trying to make “respond rationally and with no emotion, ever” a universal rule, especially with regards to interacting with other people. It’s weird and robotic.
    - cutemonster 3y ago
      Or if a kid falls and hurts their arm. (Instead of shaming them, a hug is an alternative)
    - snapplebobapple 3y ago
      I am going to assume you are misunderstanding what I said rather than intentionally responding to what I didn't say, so here it goes: I did not say don't be sad. I sad don't react emotionally, instead understand the emotion you are feeling, identify the why and respond rationally to the why. It's not bad to be sad, it's bad to allow the sadness to force you into a stupid reaction. In your example the actual good advice dictates it's fine to cry, but don't let your sadness dictate doing something stupid like drinking too much, getting behind the wheel and getting a dui or worse. In my reply I acknowledged that someone saying what the op posted was almost always trying to communicate what I have said above and failing at it.
      - jmye 3y ago
        But that’s very much not what you responded to, nor is it even similar. What you responded to was “real men don’t cry.” Whatever you were trying to add was within that context, thus my reply. “Real men don’t cry” is not well-intentioned, nor is it just a poorly worded version of good advice.
        snapplebobapple 3y ago
        I called it the crass version of good advice given in the worst possible way with deceptive context, which is true. I cannot recall a single instance of someone saying the original statement and not meaning some form of what I provided for context in my personal life outside of hollywood movies, where it seems to have become this toxic masculinity trope rather than a failure of explanation likely caused by a failure at heeding the actual advice themselves and reacting emotionally.
conception 3y ago
Also, that is not something a sane person would say, no. Having children help with chores is a key part of parenting, regardless of gender.
- euroderf 3y ago
  Furthermore, when children help with chores without expectation of immediate commensurate reward, it cultivates positive values.
- mwbajor 3y ago
  Well someone just said it in this thread, response above. So they do exist.
snapplebobapple 3y ago
When all the men got together and voted for women to also have the vote, that was toxic masculinity at work. (this is a joke, but also not really. Women shifting the political map towards larger government and more socialism seems to be the root of most of our current problems. It's kind of a big problem because women should very clearly be allowed to vote but at the same time I don't know how to reconcile that with the also very clear harm it is causing)
- euroderf 3y ago
  This begs the question, what do you consider to be socialism ?
- supertimor 3y ago
  > When all the men got together and voted for women to also have the vote, that was toxic masculinity at work. (this is a joke, but also not really. Women shifting the political map towards larger government and more socialism seems to be the root of most of our current problems. This seems like a really flawed and backwards take. What evidence do you have that supports your incredibly vague statement that women’s ability to vote is “the root of most of our current problems.” The American socialist movement began in the early 19th century and peaked in the early 20th. 1900-1920 saw the height of socialist sentiment in the US. The Socialist Party of America began to lose it’s influence in the 1920’s as socialism began to decline in popularity. Women gained the right to vote in 1920. Would that not then indicate that women gaining the right to vote led to a decline in socialist sentiment? Saying this is just as disingenuous as saying that women gaining the right to vote massively shifted the political spectrum towards socialism. A rise in socialism is historically very often a reaction to some sort of societal upheaval (i.e. war, economic crises, high levels of inequality, exploitation, etc). Forgive me if I’m wrong in assuming that you’re speaking about the US, but my point stands regardless of what country you’re referring to because blaming a century’s worth of problems on women gaining the right to vote (regardless of the country) is not a serious nor intelligent argument.
  - snapplebobapple 3y ago
    The claim was that big government was the root of most of our current problems and women in turn tend to vote for bigger government (and socialism but I used the lower case s on socialism which does not mean the Socialist party, it means a diverse group of potential policies that are all characterized by some group that isn't an individual and is usually the government owning some subset of assets and providing some subset of services) Go look at the polling records across time and you see women voting for bigger government by way of voting for groups that have policies that ensure larger government (they are not the only group doing this, they are just the group we are talking about now. Single men also lean problematic in their voting patterns for example). Talking about the Socialist party here is the wrong metric to use because it encompassed truly nutty groups that had no chance of being elected (from agricultural commune supporters to straight up communists). If you look at the subsets that actually got elected (i.e. the sewer socialists) they ran on policies like old age pensions, employment insurance, public housing, public health care and other big government welfare programs. Pretty much all this stuff had been subsumed into the big parties by the 1960's and was actually being implemented, so why would you ever expect the Socialist party to continue existing? All their electable policies (that became much more electable with women gaining the right to vote) were adopted by mainstream, usually democrat candidates who subsequently were elected. Subsequently all these programs form part of the big government problem we have today. You see the above in the USA but you also see it in my home country of Canada, most recently with the current oaf running things federally, who has been kept in power by women voters not changing their vote when it became obvious he was doing likely criminal things while pursuing a suicidal spending platform at home and making us the laughing stock of the world stage with his antics. Anyways, this is not to say women shouldn't have the vote, they very clearly should have the vote. My original post was mostly about how we integrate the clearly correct idea that women should be able to vote with the clearly correct idea that their voting patterns are causing a lot of our current problems. I think the actual correct solution is some other system of limiting suffrage to only those who clearly have long term skin in the game, as to what that would look like I am not certain. It could take the form of limiting voting to citizens who currently have at least 50 % custody/responsibility for a child of theirs or have X number of years of at least 50% custody/responsibility for a child of their under their belts. Or perhaps requiring citizens to post an income adjust long term bond to vote and have that bond be the first risk of loss if the government runs a deficit of a certain amount for more than 1 year. The challenge with limiting suffrage is having the rule be simple enough that gaming it is very difficult, while being strong enough to actually cut out enough of the people with no incentive to think long term about the country that they can't drive us into bureaucratic ruin.
badlucklottery 3y ago
> Can we have an example of toxic masculinity? A good example is if you your son is allowed help change the oil but you don't allow your daughter or wife to help because it's "man's work". Or if you force your son to help because it's expect of him as a man. But, if little dude is curious/eager and wants to hold the flashlight and maybe turn a wrench, go for it.
kthejoker2 3y ago
Extreme "pranks"? Hazing culture? Omerta? Gang culture? Wolf of Wall Street / Boiler Room culture?The thin blue line? Church scandals? Basically every domestic terrorist group in history? Four common patterns * Recruitment techniques based around achieving worth by emulating some "alpha" male, usually physical and financial, sometimes spiritual * Approval associated with risk taking behavior. Binge drinking, criminal activity, extrajudicial punishment, etc * Complicity through witness and increasing levels of participation And especially * Code of silence A heinous fifth pattern is commingling this behavior with family / work culture, creating tension between "the code" and actual codes and relationships. Ultimately these systems let sociopaths, narcissists, and other mentally unwell men to flourish and prosper precisely because they can easily adhere to these artificial "codes" and power structures vs traditional ones. Edit: at the risk of coming across of overanalyzing, asking your son to help with the oil potentially contributes to this behavior. You as a male he looks up to is "recruiting" him to do something he has no interest in doing otherwise. In a vacuum it's benign of course and not toxic but some awareness of the power dynamics and making sure your son knows the difference between a "good" ask and a "bad" ask and how to say no is important.
- mwbajor 3y ago
  I can come up with just as many harmful actions perpetuated by women and yet we don't have "toxic femininity". Thats the key difference. This line is complete trash: "recruiting him to do something he has no interest in doing otherwise". This is probably the greatest example of the lefts insanity nowadays. How do you know he isn't interested? You know nothing about my family but you assume and then push for policy using said assumptions. And you try to absolve yourself from criticism by saying "I'm just overanalyzing"!
  - conception 3y ago
    We have toxic feminism. It doesn’t get as much air time, perhaps because of the power imbalances between men and women in society. But it’s there and it is discussed.
  - em-bee 3y ago
gilbetron 3y ago
Many people (especially men) translate "toxic masculinity" as "masculinity is toxic", which is not the message. Rather, certain aspects of masculinity can be toxic. "Don't share/express your feelings", "Discard/disparage the weak", "real men don't need help", etc. A big part of toxic masculinity is taking aspects of masculinity too far. Teaching your son (or daughter!) how to change the oil and having them help you is fantastic. Calling them a wuss if they don't want to do it and forcing them to do it while they are crying because they are so upset is toxic masculinity. I have a teenage son, and if he was upset about doing chores, I would stop and talk about it with him. Help him understand, by sharing my feelings, that I, too, often hate doing chores, but that if you can figure out the right approach, you can make it an ok thing to do. Having feelings is natural and good, learning to feel the feelings without reacting without thought is something you can do. Talking about life is good, but complaining about everything is bad. Independence is great, but relying on others in a community is also great! Being tough is awesome, ignoring others feelings all the time and making fun of people who are struggling is bad. If you want to find out what toxic masculinity is, why haven't you read about it or watch any of the numerous videos about the subject?

conception 3y ago

“Why are you crying?!? Real men don’t cry!”

rootusrootus 3y ago
Exactly this. But even worse, this is frequently not said aloud. It is implicit in all of our interactions. Express too much emotion outside of certain narrow contexts, and other people (men and women alike) will look at you like you are a wimp. Nobody has to say a word.
- AlexandrB 3y ago
  I think it's worse than that. Traditional gender norms are perfectly ok with men expressing their emotions as long as those emotions are anger.
snapplebobapple 3y ago
That's just the crass version of the actually good advice that goes as follows: Don't react to your emotions, instead notice your emotions wash over you, identify the why and respond rationally instead of emotionally to the why. It's basically good advice given in the worst possible way with deceptive context
- jmye 3y ago
  Why is that good advice? If my father dies, why is it bad to be sad about it? Why is it wrong to cry when I’m sad? I think you’re completely off base in trying to make “respond rationally and with no emotion, ever” a universal rule, especially with regards to interacting with other people. It’s weird and robotic.
  - cutemonster 3y ago
    Or if a kid falls and hurts their arm. (Instead of shaming them, a hug is an alternative)
  - snapplebobapple 3y ago
    I am going to assume you are misunderstanding what I said rather than intentionally responding to what I didn't say, so here it goes: I did not say don't be sad. I sad don't react emotionally, instead understand the emotion you are feeling, identify the why and respond rationally to the why. It's not bad to be sad, it's bad to allow the sadness to force you into a stupid reaction. In your example the actual good advice dictates it's fine to cry, but don't let your sadness dictate doing something stupid like drinking too much, getting behind the wheel and getting a dui or worse. In my reply I acknowledged that someone saying what the op posted was almost always trying to communicate what I have said above and failing at it.
    - jmye 3y ago
      But that’s very much not what you responded to, nor is it even similar. What you responded to was “real men don’t cry.” Whatever you were trying to add was within that context, thus my reply. “Real men don’t cry” is not well-intentioned, nor is it just a poorly worded version of good advice.
      - snapplebobapple 3y ago
        I called it the crass version of good advice given in the worst possible way with deceptive context, which is true. I cannot recall a single instance of someone saying the original statement and not meaning some form of what I provided for context in my personal life outside of hollywood movies, where it seems to have become this toxic masculinity trope rather than a failure of explanation likely caused by a failure at heeding the actual advice themselves and reacting emotionally.

conception 3y ago

Also, that is not something a sane person would say, no. Having children help with chores is a key part of parenting, regardless of gender.

euroderf 3y ago
Furthermore, when children help with chores without expectation of immediate commensurate reward, it cultivates positive values.
mwbajor 3y ago
Well someone just said it in this thread, response above. So they do exist.

snapplebobapple 3y ago

When all the men got together and voted for women to also have the vote, that was toxic masculinity at work. (this is a joke, but also not really. Women shifting the political map towards larger government and more socialism seems to be the root of most of our current problems. It's kind of a big problem because women should very clearly be allowed to vote but at the same time I don't know how to reconcile that with the also very clear harm it is causing)

euroderf 3y ago
This begs the question, what do you consider to be socialism ?
supertimor 3y ago
> When all the men got together and voted for women to also have the vote, that was toxic masculinity at work. (this is a joke, but also not really. Women shifting the political map towards larger government and more socialism seems to be the root of most of our current problems. This seems like a really flawed and backwards take. What evidence do you have that supports your incredibly vague statement that women’s ability to vote is “the root of most of our current problems.” The American socialist movement began in the early 19th century and peaked in the early 20th. 1900-1920 saw the height of socialist sentiment in the US. The Socialist Party of America began to lose it’s influence in the 1920’s as socialism began to decline in popularity. Women gained the right to vote in 1920. Would that not then indicate that women gaining the right to vote led to a decline in socialist sentiment? Saying this is just as disingenuous as saying that women gaining the right to vote massively shifted the political spectrum towards socialism. A rise in socialism is historically very often a reaction to some sort of societal upheaval (i.e. war, economic crises, high levels of inequality, exploitation, etc). Forgive me if I’m wrong in assuming that you’re speaking about the US, but my point stands regardless of what country you’re referring to because blaming a century’s worth of problems on women gaining the right to vote (regardless of the country) is not a serious nor intelligent argument.
- snapplebobapple 3y ago
  The claim was that big government was the root of most of our current problems and women in turn tend to vote for bigger government (and socialism but I used the lower case s on socialism which does not mean the Socialist party, it means a diverse group of potential policies that are all characterized by some group that isn't an individual and is usually the government owning some subset of assets and providing some subset of services) Go look at the polling records across time and you see women voting for bigger government by way of voting for groups that have policies that ensure larger government (they are not the only group doing this, they are just the group we are talking about now. Single men also lean problematic in their voting patterns for example). Talking about the Socialist party here is the wrong metric to use because it encompassed truly nutty groups that had no chance of being elected (from agricultural commune supporters to straight up communists). If you look at the subsets that actually got elected (i.e. the sewer socialists) they ran on policies like old age pensions, employment insurance, public housing, public health care and other big government welfare programs. Pretty much all this stuff had been subsumed into the big parties by the 1960's and was actually being implemented, so why would you ever expect the Socialist party to continue existing? All their electable policies (that became much more electable with women gaining the right to vote) were adopted by mainstream, usually democrat candidates who subsequently were elected. Subsequently all these programs form part of the big government problem we have today. You see the above in the USA but you also see it in my home country of Canada, most recently with the current oaf running things federally, who has been kept in power by women voters not changing their vote when it became obvious he was doing likely criminal things while pursuing a suicidal spending platform at home and making us the laughing stock of the world stage with his antics. Anyways, this is not to say women shouldn't have the vote, they very clearly should have the vote. My original post was mostly about how we integrate the clearly correct idea that women should be able to vote with the clearly correct idea that their voting patterns are causing a lot of our current problems. I think the actual correct solution is some other system of limiting suffrage to only those who clearly have long term skin in the game, as to what that would look like I am not certain. It could take the form of limiting voting to citizens who currently have at least 50 % custody/responsibility for a child of theirs or have X number of years of at least 50% custody/responsibility for a child of their under their belts. Or perhaps requiring citizens to post an income adjust long term bond to vote and have that bond be the first risk of loss if the government runs a deficit of a certain amount for more than 1 year. The challenge with limiting suffrage is having the rule be simple enough that gaming it is very difficult, while being strong enough to actually cut out enough of the people with no incentive to think long term about the country that they can't drive us into bureaucratic ruin.

badlucklottery 3y ago

> Can we have an example of toxic masculinity? A good example is if you your son is allowed help change the oil but you don't allow your daughter or wife to help because it's "man's work". Or if you force your son to help because it's expect of him as a man. But, if little dude is curious/eager and wants to hold the flashlight and maybe turn a wrench, go for it.

kthejoker2 3y ago

Extreme "pranks"? Hazing culture? Omerta? Gang culture? Wolf of Wall Street / Boiler Room culture?The thin blue line? Church scandals? Basically every domestic terrorist group in history? Four common patterns * Recruitment techniques based around achieving worth by emulating some "alpha" male, usually physical and financial, sometimes spiritual * Approval associated with risk taking behavior. Binge drinking, criminal activity, extrajudicial punishment, etc * Complicity through witness and increasing levels of participation And especially * Code of silence A heinous fifth pattern is commingling this behavior with family / work culture, creating tension between "the code" and actual codes and relationships. Ultimately these systems let sociopaths, narcissists, and other mentally unwell men to flourish and prosper precisely because they can easily adhere to these artificial "codes" and power structures vs traditional ones. Edit: at the risk of coming across of overanalyzing, asking your son to help with the oil potentially contributes to this behavior. You as a male he looks up to is "recruiting" him to do something he has no interest in doing otherwise. In a vacuum it's benign of course and not toxic but some awareness of the power dynamics and making sure your son knows the difference between a "good" ask and a "bad" ask and how to say no is important.

mwbajor 3y ago
I can come up with just as many harmful actions perpetuated by women and yet we don't have "toxic femininity". Thats the key difference. This line is complete trash: "recruiting him to do something he has no interest in doing otherwise". This is probably the greatest example of the lefts insanity nowadays. How do you know he isn't interested? You know nothing about my family but you assume and then push for policy using said assumptions. And you try to absolve yourself from criticism by saying "I'm just overanalyzing"!
- conception 3y ago
  We have toxic feminism. It doesn’t get as much air time, perhaps because of the power imbalances between men and women in society. But it’s there and it is discussed.
- em-bee 3y ago

gilbetron 3y ago

Many people (especially men) translate "toxic masculinity" as "masculinity is toxic", which is not the message. Rather, certain aspects of masculinity can be toxic. "Don't share/express your feelings", "Discard/disparage the weak", "real men don't need help", etc. A big part of toxic masculinity is taking aspects of masculinity too far. Teaching your son (or daughter!) how to change the oil and having them help you is fantastic. Calling them a wuss if they don't want to do it and forcing them to do it while they are crying because they are so upset is toxic masculinity. I have a teenage son, and if he was upset about doing chores, I would stop and talk about it with him. Help him understand, by sharing my feelings, that I, too, often hate doing chores, but that if you can figure out the right approach, you can make it an ok thing to do. Having feelings is natural and good, learning to feel the feelings without reacting without thought is something you can do. Talking about life is good, but complaining about everything is bad. Independence is great, but relying on others in a community is also great! Being tough is awesome, ignoring others feelings all the time and making fun of people who are struggling is bad. If you want to find out what toxic masculinity is, why haven't you read about it or watch any of the numerous videos about the subject?