That is not remotely what I’ve ever taken the term “toxic masculinity” to mean.
It means the claim that in order to be properly masculine one has to fit into a stereotype that is toxic both to the other people encountered and to the men and boys who believe in it. Proper masculinity isn’t toxic. It’s the stereotype that’s toxic, and it’s poisonous to everybody, of whatever gender.
And what then is this proper masculinity, counter to the Andrew Tate and Jordan Peterson crap, that is out there beckoning to young guys? They promise “do as I instruct and all women will want you.” When, as men have known for centuries, the real goal is to find that one woman who says “I believe in you.”
Why is that no longer getting through? Of course it’s in part because of the self-serving Tates and Jordans. But I’m not convinced it’s not also from a consumerist culture that generates money from telling one half of the human race that the other half is congenitally unworthy of them; to earn more and buy more, so as to level up to only the best percentage of those asshole guys.
Except for fringe movies and videos, I have never seem that version of male behavior.
I spend most of the 80s, in a frat, at a party school.
I am not proud, of much of what I saw and did.
But I never saw any males interact in that way.
A lot of other terrible things happened, but that conversation would have be outside of ‘the code’
Just my experiences.
It’s true that men are directly judged for lack of romantic and sexual success, and
it’s terrible that it’s so common to mock and blame them for their lack of success in these areas, even among usually socially conscious people. It should be no more socially acceptable than calling a woman ugly. But it doesn’t stop all those things sucking on their own terms. The majority of people of both sexes want a romantic relationship, they want to find someone to share their life with, many want a family. Even if there were no judgement from society, they are still going to be unhappy if they can’t find them, especially when other people around them are seemingly having an easy time getting partners, and they don’t know what they are doing wrong.
Even if you got rid of this social conditioning, some people are always going to be more attractive than others, for a broad definition of ‘attractive’. Some are going to have more difficulty finding partners than others - and people with less than stellar social skills, who have trouble reading signals, are always going to be at a disadvantage, because those skills are directly needed in dating and negotiating the beginning of a relationship.
If there are no gendered virtues, then how can there be a non-toxic masculinity (or femininity for that matter)? Not meaning to pick on you, because I don’t think this was what you are saying, but IMO this is the problem we run into when saying men need positive role models. If your philosophy is very much that men and women should be the same, should be held to the same standards and possess the same virtues, what space is there for masculinity and femininity? Any way in which men try to distinguish themselves from women is, almost by definition, toxic, so how can you have a positive model of masculinity?
An idea I’ve seen online and think there is some truth to, is that as a society we have systematically taken activities and character traits and virtues that used to ‘belong’ to men and boys and made them unisex, and they only options left for men and boys to distinguish themselves from women and girls are the masculine vices - leaving toxic masculinity as the only kind available.
The counter to my assertion that there are no gendered virtues would be to cite a few that apply to one sex but not the other.
I can only speak from my own experience, but getting advice from peers or friends or relatives who are a little older was much more common than asking
Yeah, that part of the story left me confused.
What could she have said that resulted in an instaban from the group?
She goes in crying (?). Someone asks what happened. "Oh, . . . . " and what did the rest of the conversation look like?
That said, he dodged a bullet. Rejections are never nice, but for someone to not be able to handle it and do something that toxic is someone you are better off without. Likewise, a social group that only listens to one person’s side and then is so rude in a group you wouldn’t want to be part of.
Back to the OP. I don’t have an account or I couldn’t read the article, but Japan has a similar problem of a percentage of the male population which has more difficulty getting married.
Whatever it was, she probably said it out of embarrassment. “Do you want to fuck me?” is an incredibly lame come-on line, whether spoken by a man or by a woman, with more red flags than a May Day parade. And then she doubled down on it! I think @Robot_Arm’s problem was that he didn’t realize that she was even worse at flirting than he was.
You mean @k9bfriender. He was the one with the story. I was responding to @Robot_Arm’s comments about his post.
I’m still curious what she said.
If she had gone in and said @k9bfriender just shot me down, would they ask him to leave by going around the house?
Back in college, there was one of the women who was really interested in one of the men. We were on skiing trip and she was really upset that he wasn’t returning her affections. Consequently, she got really drunk and we had to take her back to the motel room.
We all knew what was going on. When someone in the group is hitting on someone else in the group, what’s the chance no one noticed?
Right. Sorry to everybody involved.
Men who have my respect have traits like a deep sense of responsibility, endurance to the end of onerous tasks, awareness of the needs of others, and respect for what women bring to the table. They try to listen, even if they are, culturally and perhaps genetically, much crappier at it than women. A lot of men I know seem to really enjoy fixing what is broken, something I don’t find in myself or in most other women. They also like to team up with other men to fix what’s broken. They get cars out of ditches, join volunteer fire departments, and take pleasure in physical skill, strength and prowess, which they use to help others. That, frankly, is very masculine, and sexy.
In all fairness, Andrew Tate and Jordan Peterson have very different philosophies that are often contradictory to each other.
But IMHO a lot of the problems young men (and women) are having with relationships IS a result of being part of a highly consumerist, narcissistic, and actually very isolating digital culture. A culture that from my perspective tells people that they only have value as a package of stats and metrics that will generate “likes” from total strangers in lieu of actual physical contact.
The things people are mentioning here - men being judged for not being successful romantically, making enough money, or even acting like toxic jerks have been true forever.
I think everything has been amplified because people spend too much time online and not in the real world. It creates a warped view of what a “real man” should be as well as a warped unreasonable standard for the “real woman” he thinks he deserves.
So I think this leads to a lot of intense anger and frustration towards women who don’t fit into that narrow profile for what they think a woman should be while doubling down on the exaggerated toxic behaviors they think attract women, based on their echo chamber of other incels.
It is getting through to a lot of men, though.
It primarily generates money by telling everybody of all genders that they’re congenitally unworthy of anybody unless they Buy These Products.
There can be a non-toxic humanity. It is human to be male; it is human to be female; it is human to be any of a number of other permutations. Why should it be less masculine to be brave because women can also be brave? Why should it be less masculine to be protective of one’s family because women can also be protective of their families? Why should it be less masculine to be tall because women can also be tall?
Masculinity or femininity isn’t a virtue. It’s a style. For some people, that style is deep in their essence. And the most genuinely masculine and feminine people I’ve met expect, or at least want, people of other genders to exhibit the virtues that they do.
(bolding mine)
my take: not dating a shorter than 5.1ft guy (because stars did not line up) is not discrimination, saying you would NOT date a guy shorter than 5.1ft (or a jew or an arab or a person of color (or other characteristic that they cannot change)) IS discrimination.
… pretty much the definition of discrimination
[crying]
‘I asked him if he was interested in me, and he shouted that he didn’t want to fuck me.’
[/crying]
I could see that working.
I think (but have no hard proof) that Social Media are both causing and amplifying these tendencies … the proverbial example of IG-bloggers posting from “luxury travels” and not having money to eat … that is somewhat of a breeding-ground for this shallowness …
About 2005 I took the very concious decision to NOT be part of SM - mostly b/c I knew it would all be about window-dressing and a huge time sink.
Not quite Sesame Steet, but I like the way “The Muppet Show” character Waldorf (one of the two grumpy audience critics, the other is Stadler) treats his wife, Astoria.
He’s very sweet under his gruff exterior.
If she was very upset and said she had made a fool of herself and she was too embarrassed to face him again, maybe? Honestly, it sounds like she was even more socially awkward than @k9bfriender.
This isn’t a factual question. The issue is whether there should be virtues considered masculine and feminine, even though they will not in practice be limited to men and women respectively. My point is that if your ideal is there being no differences between men and women, it’s impossible to have a positive vision of masculinity (or femininity), since it would go against that ideal.
You said it yourself: if it applies to both sexes, it’s humanity, not masculinity. But I don’t think women being tall, protective, or brave is a problem for having a positive conception of masculinity, it’s society seeing those attributes as equally ‘belonging’ to women (or alternatively, denigrating them by eg calling protectiveness benevolent sexism).
That would make sense for that day - but it doesn’t explain
You think women should be tall, protective, and brave but that society should refuse to acknowledge that this is possible?
The wrong kind of “protectiveness” can be.
A type and degree of protectiveness that’s entirely appropriate for one’s six year old child can be entirely inappropriate directed towards one’s wife. Or toward a co-worker or a stranger.
There are other types and degrees of protectiveness that are appropriate towards anybody – including towards adult men.
It’s not clear to me whether @k9bfriender made any attempt to contact them again; or whether they were themselves so embarrassed by the encounter that they avoided most of the group.
It’s also not clear to me whether they ever tried to find out why they were told to leave and to do so without coming back into the house.
I believe there are plenty of studies that prove that is correct.
Not just shallowness, but a certain superficialness that comes from only seeing someone through a highly curated and polished filter of what they want to show you about their lives.
Also I think it’s too easy for young people to just be alone in their apartment these days. They have all manner of digital entertainment to occupy their time. Sure. we had videogames and TV and VCRs back in the day, but if I spent all my time in my 20s holed up in my apartment I’d lose my mind with boredom.
I think this not only prevents them from developing the skills for meeting someone to have a relationship with, it also makes it less desirable to be in a long-term relationship. Why put up with all that messy relationship bullshit when you can have transactional relationships through some dating app?