[ POLL ] Traditional Masculinity.

Post Reply New Topic

For some people, "Toxic Masculinity" (and submission to it) is not just acceptable, but it is THE proper way of life. Such people simply cannot see the damage they are causing (or enabling); or, if they do, then the are blind to the fact that they caused the damage, and place all of the blame on the very people they have damaged...

"If you weren't such a wimp, that punch in the jaw wouldn't have hurt you!"

"Aw honey! See what you made me do? Go put some ice on it and don't let the neighbors see it."

"If you didn't want it stolen, you should've held on to it better!"

"Dressed up like that, she was certainly asking for it!"

... which was how 'Traditional' males were supposed to behave when I was growing up.

So, to repeat the general theme of this thread, Traditional Masculinity, which is marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression is, on the whole, harmful.

I see nothing wrong with being stoic. Or is that a "dog whistle" now or something? I ask in all seriousness because it's hard to keep up these days with what's been deemed as such.

The problem isn't with stoicism, it's with teaching boys not to express their feelings, not to have feelings, not to understand their own feelings. That leads to many problems later in life that could be avoided if we taught both boys and girls what feelings are, that we all have them, and how to express them in a healthy way.

I am a stoic person by nature, I don't express a lot of emotional externally and I tend to be quiet and withdrawn when under stress. This doesn't mean I wasn't taught as a child how to recognize my own feelings and how to express them when I wish to. So you're right, there's nothing wrong with being stoic. The problem is it's not stoicism that is being encouraged in boys, it's denial of human emotion and not providing them with healthy ways to express their feelings. "Boys don't cry" and all that sexist nonsense, that's the problem.

Well ... I think (for example) that it's alright to treat minor injuries or illnesses yourself and downplay the pain or symptoms, or to quietly weep at a funeral for a loved one (unless you just can't help but let it all out); but to not let your closest relatives and friends know that you have a terminal illness until the last possible moment, or to sit there stone-faced and barely breathing as they lower your parent, sibling, spouse or child into a grave because it's not the 'manly' thing to do ... that's just plain wrong.

I've had to carry on with work after seeing co-workers die horribly, and my siblings and I had to physically support each other during our dad's funeral. Life isn't a battlefield, my friends. You should be allowed to bring your own world to a halt and deal with pain and grief on your own terms, without some macho a$$hole making you feel even worse for expressing your feelings.

It's all well and good to accept people who don't fall into traditional gender roles and stereotypes, but that goes both ways. The idea that on the whole, the traits listed here are harmful is something I can't agree with. Moreover, the idea that these traits are entirely socialised is something I take issue with as well. Men have much higher levels of testosterone than women, and testosterone plays an enormous role in influencing some of these behaviours.
https://www.healthline.com/health/low-testosterone/effects-on-body#8

In addition, these traits actually also help society thrive. If you think about a business/company, or working environment, all of the traits listed are assets. Stoicism produces results. Competitiveness and a desire for dominance are assets to a company's ability to out-do competitors. Aggressiveness, when defined as "determination and forcefulness" rather than "hostile and violent behaviour", helps companies stay afloat at their worst and thrive at their best. Without these traits in business, I'd imagine society would be a lot less advanced.

So to conclude, if some men want to be stoic, competitive, dominant or aggressive, we as a society should only interfere with that on a case-by case basis when it is harmful to others. Otherwise, leave "traditionally masculine" men be how they wish.

I would say, any stereotype, even if in line with the majority, is harmful if it is seen as the only option.
It is unhealthy when people are isolated from their true emotions because either "boys don't cry" or "girls never fight" or any other stereotype like that.
Do you know what subtle social hell my female classmates made because I was competitive and a girl shouldn't be like that in their world?

So, while I agree that the traditional stereotype is unhealthy, making an opposite stereotype of a peaceful, never confrontantional and openly emotional "new male" would not be any better. It's just narrowness of these stereotypes that is unhealthy.

I try to be peaceful, reasonable, and upbeat at work and at church. In both places, people were shocked as hell when they found out the hard way that I can be "pushed too far".

Of course, according to them, they were "just joking" when they said those mean, racist, sexist things in my presence, and that I was "over-reacting" when I got in their faces and called them out on their behavior.

Imagine my reaction to the son and grandson of a church founder who said in public that women should "know their place" and stick to being wives and mothers (in that order), while leaving the income-earning to their husbands.



Yeah ... that's about right ...

I'm not really surprised. It seems all the "experts" have lost their minds.

Next they'll be telling us to cut our balls off or something.

Yes, everyone wants all men to cut their balls off. Then we can stop reproducing entirely and the human species can die out. It's a win for everyone!

Definitely everyone thinks this way, bravo for noticing. "Ban all men! Down with humanity!"

Your response is very rational, just as rational as us people who think toxic masculinity is not the best idea are irrational. You win the logic game! Where shall we send your prize?

Women no longer have to defer to men or depend on men for support. Deal with it.

Non-whites no longer have to live in fear of whites, either. Deal with that, as well.

Racism and sexism will not be tolerated on this website. If you can't deal with that, then YOU don't belong here, either!

I know rules are rules, but a lot of people just react to bad experiences. I just think it's a better idea to let them express that ugliness here where there is a good community that can talk some sense into them.

I like to see myself as both the artist and the warrior. In some ways, I am. I even wear German helmets sometimes to show that I'm a war supporter. Some seniors around my area like it because they know that I'd rather be fighting for my country than hanging around the park smoking Pot all day. I'm in Canada BTW. If I was fit and spry, I would be doing that. There is one old man who hates it, but I don't let him stop me from expressing myself. I'm too old and fat to be in the Army and I think my helmets make me look cuddly.

I guess that makes me sick according to the APA.

love sports, love watching contact sport too, was pretty decent at some sports as a youngster, I also love the arts, I was the only of my friends when young who always had their nose in a book and love understanding behind the scenes of the art world. Was kick boxing until recently and I gym everyday to lift weights which I love, but I am quiet and would probably not be seen as a 'man's man'

also very relaxed about most things socially, people should just do whatever feels good to them as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. If someone wants to identify as something or dress up as something, who am I to tell them they are wrong if it makes them feel happy?!

Yes and No. It's complicated.

Yes, it's harmful to my effeminate and queer non-traditionally masculine gay friends who endure ridicule, taunts, and teases from others throughout their lives. That can be traumatizing & damaging. There are a lot of children, teens, young men & older who have a lot of difficulty with these things and overcoming the way they're perceived and treated by others. (FTR I am masculine and assumed to be straight so do not have these problems, but I am very aware of them from my much gayer friends.) I can see why the APA considers traditional masculinity to be damaging.. even to masculine straight boys who aren't raised to be open about their emotions and such.

and No.. these traditional masculinity traits are what perpetuates the survival of our species via the age old cliche of "survival of the fittest." There's a reason we have evolved to behave this way, and while it's unpleasant for some of the "softer," folks out there, it's necessary that the "harder," ones stay strong, fit, and dominant in order for there to be safety and security for others, as well as to provide for them & theirs. No reason to be as*holes about things for no good reason, but there are plenty of reasons to be strong & firm about most things in life - especially when they pertain to obtaining & maintaining survival essentials like food, water, clothing, shelter, medicine etc. Can't be weak if you want to live.. and especially so if modern society collapses and the conveniences we're all so used to disappear. If and when that happens, the APA can take their "this is damaging," stuff and shove it while the weak die and the strong survive.