FYI,military strength and physical fitness requirements have only increased in the last few decades.
Modern soldiers regularly carry more than 50 kg.
I was watching a discussion between jordan petersen and josh rogan about dating and they were saying guys need to be more masculine because women like the alpha male.
This is possibly the worst possible advice you could give young men about dating, IMO, next only to “Don’t bother to wash”. Because so many young men try too hard to look masculine and at best come across as jerks.
And it made me realize that, IMO, masculinity, and “being a man” is tied up with a level of maturity and self-assurance. Anyone trying to appear masculine will seem boyish to me.
(This is not to imply women are not mature, very obviously. I don’t believe positive traits of masculinity, and positive traits of femininity or people in general, are exclusive)
It’s complicated.
I’ve seen many guys display what would be considered “toxic-masculinity” traits, and yet they would attract women. Stereotypical nice guys finish last.
Oh for fucks sake. Jordan Peterson? That charlatan is the arbiter of what is and is not appropriatiy masculine?
Um you really can’t make the correlation between having physical strength and the ability to protect?
You’d be surprised how often the idea is a deterrent.
Besides you can’t just shoot someone Everytime they say “what are you gonna do about it” because they won’t leave some girl alone.
You can’t be a 90lb bouncer because hey you can just shoot people.
And if both people have guns than literally being the fastest makes you much more likely to win.
Ooh, great point!
Asking for a cite that men, in general, are bigger and stronger than women is more than slightly preposterous. So is the idea that protection necessarily involves exploitation.
Just the opposite is true.
We make the observation that men, on average, differ from women in various ways. Non-toxic masculinity, or chivalry, decides based on that observation how men should act. It does not assert that men cannot help what they do. It says very clearly and directly that they can help it, and should, and expects them to.
That’s not an act of upholding “toxic masculinity”. It’s an act of upholding non-toxic masculinity, and it is doing quite the reverse of what you allege.
Men are not the helpless victims of their biology, and chivalry does not allege that they are.
Regards,
Shodan
“Every man I meet wants to protect me. I can’t figure out what from.”
― Mae West
It’s not that there’s anything toxic about an individual male’s chivalrous behavior (there isn’t). It’s at the collective level that it starts to look a bit like a protection racket. If there’s a toxicity attached to the individual masculinity involved — according to the women who have discussed this with me w/regard to their personal experience thereof — it manifests in one of these forms:
• Guys trying to curtail her freedom and restrict her behavior for her own good, on the grounds that whatever she was about to do would put her in danger from Other Men;
• Guys expecting lots of gratitude and romantic delight at having a Hero defend her from those Other Men, and getting quite sour if she points out the protection-racket characteristics of the overall situation
Yep. So puff out your chest, take up more space in the room, deliberately forget to shave, and hock your dip into the nearest spitoon. Then when women aren’t interested in you, the only possible explanation is that you aren’t manly enough. So you can either admit that you are a pathetic loser who doesn’t deserve to live, or you can double down on being even MORE stereotypically manly-er.
And then we get threads asking, “What is toxic masculinity?”
About Chivalry-There was this article I read last year titled Chivalry Isn’t What You Think It Is! A Woman Explains. It is about the role of chivalry in modern times, both what it current is, and what it should be. One passage reads
I think there is also something here in the idea of who is defining the concept of what makes you masculine or feminine. When women post about how much work they have to put in to getting ready for work each day, the high cost (money, time and effort) involved in looking the way society expects them to look, I feel like they mostly mean that they don’t want to be judged as un-feminine by their female peers. When men talk about not being able to show weakness, share feeling, touch their male friends, etc, they mean they don’t want to be judged as un-masculine, mostly by other men. This isn’t to say there aren’t men and women judging the opposite sex, but I think a lot of the flack comes from folks of the same sex as the person being judged.
Is this true? I thought it was because of standards set by males, not females…but I’m a male myself. What say the females?
If you think physical assault is an appropriate response to someone who didn’t do what was asked (and that resulted in damage), I’d hate to be your employee. If I had the time I’d open a pit thread. Yikes.
I think the mistake made, both by incels and MGTOW types and PUAs and such, as well as (for lack of a better term) radfems and such on the other side, is not to understand that there is a difference between toxic masculinity, and non-toxic. They are not about the same things.
A gentleman does not behave chivalrously as a dominance display, nor does he do it to pick up chicks. He doesn’t do it to prove that he is a man. He does it because he is a man.
A good deal of my thinking on issues like this is shaped by my experience in judo and jujitsu. Especially it is shaped by the example of my beloved sensei Tom, and his understanding of the senpai-kohai system. Like anything else, it can be abused, but when it works it means that lower ranks respect the experience of the upper ranks, and also that upper ranks respect the inexperience of the lower. It goes both ways - lower ranks trust in the authority of the upper, and upper ranks are responsible for making sure that the trust is well earned.
Sensei was an absolute bug on this kind of thing. As I grew up, I started to understand why it was so important. In that atmosphere of controlled violence, it is vital that everyone understood that and why they could trust each other. It doesn’t mean we didn’t beat the crap out of each other - we did. But there were lines that were never, ever crossed. In our dojo, if you are there to hurt somebody you won’t be there for long.
I was on both sides of the divide. I started as a white belt, as we all do, and learned that the upper ranks would beat on me as hard as necessary - and no harder. And would take the time to show me things, and I figured out that when they said something, they deserved to be taken seriously. And then I moved up the rankings, and also figured out “OK, so you can beat a white belt. BFD - what do either of you learn from doing that? Practice something new, so he’s got a chance. And show him some of the stuff you already know.”
And now I am old, but the lessons remain with me. If you want to prove you’re the strongest, take the most responsibility.
Regards,
Shodan
And there’s your toxicity, right there. If I believe myself to be male in character through and through, then it’s unnecessarily damaging for other people to examine my traits and tell me that I’m actually feminine.
Your definition of what is a tomboy is something that we all in this thread know and take as a given when discussing the issue
So you take responsibility just to prove something to yourself, and not to benefit others? Do you feel diminished, less masculine, when you are forced to ask for help?
Yup to all of this. Calling it a protection racket is spot on because sometimes I feel like chivalrous men are in a conspiracy with bad guys to ensure they always have a woman to rescue.
So, you’re saying that your arguments are similar to a claim that water starts to boil at 212 degrees - only true at sea level, but totally wrong in most other conditions, such as at high altitude?