As a partially disabled man, unable to run and too weak to fight, I’m on guard a lot. It’s fucking exhausting. Yet it’s still a tiny fraction of what women experience. The entirety of unwanted attention and actions against women is too much to really comprehend for men.
What change can we make as men that will be a rising tide, lifting both men and women?
I’m very much a proponent of 2A rights. But carrying, by itself, is not going to eliminate fear, and may not even moderate it significantly. And someone that’s disabled may not be able to effectively use a firearm, and they certainly won’t be able to use one effectively with training.
Uh, what? I’m Canadian, but isn’t the Second Amendment a negative right? The government isn’t allowed to stop you from carrying a gun. You can agree with that and still think there are reasons an individual might not want to carry a gun.
Explain to me then, how it is that you think that a person with a firearm is going to suddenly not feel any fear. Do soldiers charge into machine gun fire without hesitation because they themselves are armed? How is a person with cerebral palsy reasonably expected to wield a firearm?
I believe you should have the right to own and carry the firearm that works best for you, if you want to. But a gun isn’t a magical talisman that will protect you simply by it’s presence.
In my experience, people who carry firearms are much more afraid than normal, because they have a physical object that reminds them to be afraid every time they step out the front door. And in every situation, from the barber to the grocery, they’ve got this heavy metal thing weighing them down while they wonder if this is the time to use it.
If you don’t mind sharing, where do you live? I’m able bodied but in my 31 years I’ve literally had to run or fight only once, and it was in a neighborhood I knew was bad. Meaning if I wasn’t able bodied I would not have gone there.
Just makes me think you live in the slums of Chicago or some harsh place. I’ve been all over western Canada and there’s maybe two neighborhoods I’d think you’d want to avoid. So it’s hard for me to imagine a person living in constant fear unless they are in or near those neighborhoods.
maybe the real message is women saying: “We are scared of unknown men.”
It's not unknown men, it's alone with men, period. Most sexual assaults are not stranger-rapes; they're sexual assaults being committed by a person that was known to the victim. Often it's an intimate partner, a date, a close friend, or someone that they went to class/church/etc. with. If people you know aren't safe, then how could you trust strangers?
No one alone with no witnesses, at least. And there's the issue, isn't it? It's not, "would you rather be in a crowded bar with a mix of men and women, --or-- would you rather be in a crowded bar full of bears".
Also, most folks are horrible judges of character and intention. Scumbags are usually the most charming, outgoing, and well-liked people, and yet most people think the awkward weirdo in the corner bothering nobody is the 'threat'.
“I think we should all wear the same exact clothes. Because it seems to be what happens eventually, anyway. Anytime you see a movie or a TV show where there’s people from the future or another planet, they’re all wearing the same outfit. I think the decision just gets made: “All right, everyone, from now on, it’s just gonna be the one-piece silver suit with the V stripe and the boots. That’s the outfit. We’re gonna be visiting other planets, we wanna look like a team here. The individuality thing is over.”
Haven’t read this yet. And I’m sure there’s plenty of men who are unwilling to be parents or who are crap partners.
But let’s be real; this is the Atlantic. So instead of covering the real systemic issue: the world is on fire and every bit of labor and value is being squeezed to its last drop to fill the dead coffers of the rentier elite, it’s gonna be: why we don’t got more kids? Men.
It’s not about women being free to pursue jobs, or men being toxic. If society is not producing offspring, en masse, it’s because society sucks. My hot take.
This guy is so close but got stuck jerking off his own intellectualism half way.
As a rule masculinity and femininity are both a collection of traits. Usually defined something like this:
Masculinity is assertiveness, confidence and maybe something like independence.
Femininity is Emotional intelligence, Empathy and maybe something like team-coordination.
Now I view these groups like the hormones testosterone and estrogen. You need both to function. But the ratio between them defines whether you appear masculine or feminine.
You need to be capable of displaying both groups.
However, currently one side demonizes masculine traits, while the other side calls feminine traits gay.
The Author is close to the truth, in the sense that the traits he describes as good masculine traits shouldn’t be exclusive to men. But he looses the plot by tying the traits directly and exclusively to the genders. This is illustrated by calling Margaret Thatcher an honorary man instead of a masculine woman.
Because of this he concludes, that everyone should have all traits regardless of group. This is correct but looses the significance of these groups, both in terms of role models and sexuality.
He accurately points out the issues and ridiculousness of current masculinity gurus but misses why they are appealing. The need for guidance amongst young men is evident.
But let’s leave aside all discussion of what makes someone a real “man” and just aspire to become decent human beings.
This quote betrays a general misunderstanding of what the issue is. Becoming a decent human is not a problem. The issue is becoming a (good) man. Society has gone far in expanding women’s possibilities, but the traditional roles for men have not really been changed, so they don’t fit into this new environment. This leads to a lot of confusion, to where we have cis men struggling to perform their gender and looking for help.
Now Tate and company offer some form of help. Its terrible, but it speaks to the problem, while Mr. Robinson pretends like the problem doesn’t exist and just tells young man to become good humans.
Its often interesting to view gender issues through the trans lens. In this case I would argue that the Author would approach a trans man, who is asking how to be a man very differently.
In my opinion this article is part of the problem driving more men to become Tate-stans and misogynists.
TL;DR: Everyone should display all traits, but the ratio is significant to determine overall appearance.
The existence of stereotypes like tomboy show that there is a link between traits and gender, but on an individual basis the ratio of traits can swap. And that’s also cool.
Also the author is an ideolog ignoring the problem he writes about.
This is illustrated by calling Margaret Thatcher an honorary man instead of a masculine woman.
The author is quoting here, he didn’t say that himself:
Josh Hawley, who thinks the left is waging a war on our Masculine Virtues, defines those virtues as “courage, independence, and assertiveness,” presumably qualities that women aren’t meant to have—or if they do possess them, it simply means they’re Manly women (just as Thatcher becomes an honorary man in Mansfield’s formulation)
Society has gone far in expanding women’s possibilities, but the traditional roles for men have not really been changed, so they don’t fit into this new environment. This leads to a lot of confusion, to where we have cis men struggling to perform their gender and looking for help.
I don’t think anybody should ever “perform” a gender! As soon as it becomes a performance, it is unauthentic to the person they truly are, and needs to be deconstructed. The don’t need instructions on how to ‘perform’ a gender, they need instructions on how to free themselves from these expectations.
In this case I would argue that the Author would approach a trans man, who is asking how to be a man
There is nothing a trans man has to do in order to be a man. They are a man. There is nothing that could possibly make them less of a man. No instructions needed. Just be authentic to yourself.
He does refer to a quote, but I think the “honorary man” wording comes from him. If he quotes it, the rest of the article still proves that he links these trait-groups exclusively to either gender.
Gender performance isn’t something you fake, like in a theater, it’s more something you do like performing in a sport. I should have clarified that.
Also being yourself is not an answer. Young people are struggling with exactly that. Being yourself only works, if you know what yourself is. Gender traits or role models can give great guidelines for what you strive to be. And somewhere along your growth as a person you will find things that work and things that don’t. But you need some “starting direction” because yourself is usually still a kid.
For the trans thing, my wording is a bit unclear.
I meant acting like a (stereotypical) man.
You can say that they are a man as soon as they identify as one. I would also treat people that way. But the goal of most trans people is being recognized as their identified gender, without stating it, also called passing.
If you talk to trans people, there is often a concept of performing gender. This includes fashion and voice, but also mannerisms. To some these mannerisms come naturally, some train them to be more in line with how they view themselves.
I think these mannerisms and to an extend fashion are things that young men are also looking to modify in order to pass as men.
The obvious difference being that trans men switch gender, while cis men just go from boys to men.
Gender performance isn’t something you fake, like in a theater, it’s more something you do like performing in a sport.
I really like the analogy because it implies something that also happens in reality: it is competitive. You’re seen as inferior if you aren’t good at it. Which is a huge, huge problem
But you need some “starting direction” because yourself is usually still a kid.
I think it is a fair point. But masculinity (however you define it) should not be a default, and it should not be specifically encouraged for boys to aspire to. Like, I understand the need for role models, but why is masculinity relevant here?
But the goal of most trans people is being recognized as their identified gender, without stating it, also called passing.
I think the desire of a lot of men (trans or not) to conform to gender norms is not because we genuinely enjoy being masculine, it is rather because we enjoy more respect when we conform to these gender roles. Being “less of a man” sucks because people treat you as inferior. So we are inclined to conform. I am not trans but I can imagine that some feel a higher need to “prove” their masculinity because they are constantly invalidated.
I agree, that just masculinity is a bad direction, but it helps narrow down possible directions. It’s just a very easy group you are kinda born into. A lot of people seem to need frameworks to tailor their lives after, as seen by the tate-stans, or kardashian-stans for women.
I agree, that picking traits of several different people and freestyle some of your own is a better way to do it. But that is difficult sometimes and just being told what to do seems to appeal to a large chunk of people.
Kinda like using Linux vs Windows/Mac XD
Your point about loosing at gender like loosing in sports is great. I will definitely think more about the competition aspect sometime. It definitely is a thing with men (see dick-size jokes), idk if it is the same for women, though. There are definetly insults amongst women (slut/bitch) but I’m not sure if it has the same “less of insert gender” connotation.
To address this there probably needs to be a similar shift in gender roles for men, as there was for women. Women now are displaying a lot of traditionally male traits, while vegan men are called gay (derogatorily).
Idk how that shift will happen, but I think the first step would be for everyone to accept anger as an emotion. This would have multiple effects. First the “women are emotional” argument is moot, just look at crime rates. Secondly recognizing it as an emotion removes a lot of the stigma, thereby allowing men to deal with it instead of repressing. And lastly it might remove the “ranking” of emotions. Ranking in the sense, that when a woman cries and a man gets angry in response to something the man is expected to take care of the woman. This usually leads to more repressing.
All in all, I like the queer community, even if I’m mostly straight, just because I don’t have to compete in the gender game. Just not caring gives me a lot of confidence, ironically making me more masculine in traditional settings. XD
kind of feel weird about you both using trans men as demonstrating your argument without either of you actually being trans. there are as many kinds of trans men as there are cis, and you can find examples of those of us who enjoy conforming to stereotypical masculinity and those of us who don’t
it’s also fairly presumptuous to assume every trans person’s goal is to pass, and also to presume the intent behind the goal of passing
honestly even presuming that trans men are asking how to be men, instead of defining it for themselves, is very presumptuous
like, the points you’re making, in general, aren’t bad. but it kind of feels icky to presume a minority’s goal and to also use it as an argument, when that minority’s reasoning is wide and varied. i think most people don’t like being treated like a monolith and i think that applies here, too
trans men were also largely unnecessary for the arguments you were making. a lot of it could be said for people who want to or enjoy (or don’t!) presenting masculine, regardless of sex assigned at birth. the answer to the author’s question, why should we have positive examples of masculinity, really boils down to, because some people like being masculine, but not toxic. trans men aren’t really special in that regard
anyways, keep in mind that i don’t speak for all trans men, but this trans man felt weird about this, like i’m being referenced as a demographic with no regard for what being in the demographic is like. thanks for reading
I don’t think anybody should ever “perform” a gender!
“Perform” in a sociological sense doesn’t mean inauthentic. It simply means to fulfill a societal role. We perform constantly. I do. You do. The author does. We perform as spouses, parents, children, siblings, professionals, leaders, followers, etc.
This performance is a huge burden for me, and also for so many other people. I do very poorly, and because of that, I am not as well respected. My life would be way better if this sort of pressure didn’t exist. It makes no sense to me that I have to fulfill a specific societal role because of the gender I was born into. So I’d say yes, it very much means that performing a gender is inauthentic for a lot of people.
That’s not Russian mentality at all. It’s more that people don’t believe that they can change things anyway - but Russians are in general not to much into their government, I would say quite the opposite of ultimate subjects.
Thats text book russian mentality: part of why nothing changes over there is because the people are willing to endure terrible living conditions, governments sending them into the meat grinder, corruption, virtually anything wrong, out of a weird mix of stubborn pride and stoic resignation. Perfect subjects: hardy, accepting, nationalistic.
Have you ever been to russia? The mentality is more of a general not giving a shit and nothing really matters. People don’t like or trust the state in general (some love it in stockholm syndrome kind of way) and laws are more like an inconvenience. The corruption is deep ingrained into society and does not just come from the government. Funny thing if, you read Leskov it appears it’s been like this since before the revolution almost 200 years ago.
It’s what Timothy Snyder called “the politics of inevitability” in his excellent 2017 book, “The Road to Unfreedom.” I highly recommend said book to anyone who wants to understand Putin’s larger project. It’s almost like Snyder had a crystal ball that he could see into the future with.
Loads of people are dying because of political decisions in other countries too and you rarely see uprisings, only difference is that in Russia the cause of the deaths is more obvious
Yea, one thing I feel is that vegans really are letting perfect be the enemy of good. While I do empathise and am eating less meat myself, I feel like screeching on people being omnis is missing the forest for the trees; if most people did like what you mentioned, eating meat once a week, that's 6/7th less animals slaughtered. Along with the reductions in emissions and whatever environmental impact too, of rearing so many animals for their meat.
When I, a man, am eating by myself I include meat sparingly, but when I eat food prepared by the women in my life, meat is front and centre and hard to avoid. I guess that is the threat to masculinity? The “why won’t he eat this perfectly good meal I made for him?”
You want me to lie? I’m not necessarily looking for “planty meals”. I gravitate in that direction when I cook because that’s the kind of food I can make taste good, but that is not necessarily someone else’s skillset. There is nothing wrong with the meat dishes put in front of me. They taste good too.
Look up the history and origin of making gravy and sauces … modern gravies and sauces were started and developed in the Middle Ages for beef and meat dishes to mask the taste of rotten or semi rotten food.
Yes I know there are other sauces and gravies for vegetables … but the little dish of gravy for your roast beef supper was started because someone just wanted their food to taste less like a rotting carcass because they had no refrigeration back then.
Agreed … every time I make steak, or chicken, or turkey, or pork, I always carefully collect the drippings, make a roux and mix my own gravy. I’ve done the same with goose, moose and caribou.
Takes lots of practice but now everyone raves about my gravy … no homo tho.
These studies are made through a lens of "men have frail egos, how else can we frame this viewpoint".
I don't give a fuck about "masculinity" or "femininity". If it's cheap, tastes good, and isn't full of EEEEEEs, I'll buy it. Standard "aubergine", tomatoes, spring onions and whatever aren't tasty without a whole lot of prep. Fuck salads. Give me that cheap, spicy, Indian sauce that I can lather onto sweet potato purree, carrot pasta, and pickled mango... and it costs less than a dish with a fucking steak? Hell yeah I'm buying it! Steak will be what I eat when I go out.
Make another study focusing on pricing and how much money you can save per year eating veggie and I bet my ass it'll have an impact. These stupid "my gender is better than your gender" bullshit doesn't help.
Most modern social “science” papers are just “people I agree with are actually just superior people, and everyone I disagree with is stupid and dumb”, with the most blatant statistics fuckery on earth
Also because it’s still the only way to get enough protein unless you want to drink a bunch of shakes every day. Anyone who has counted calories before can tell you that most men are deficient unless they’re heavy meat eaters.
As a vegetarian for 30 uears and now Vegan for probably 2-3 years, i can attest that your protien statement is false. i have never done protien shakes as a diet supplement. The lentils I buy are 30% protien. Other Beans are good also.
Bloody hell, that guy woke up with a condom inside him. They clearly wanted him to know he was raped. The abuse of power and exploitation of these young men - disgusting
I still get sad at the surprise women have when I move before they do
Is this actually a thing? I’ve always moved away from everyone’s path and never noticed anyone feeling surprised by that. And from every man I’ve ever walked with, I can only remember one who I noticed didn’t make room for other people.
Oh, it’s totally a thing. I’m a woman and short, so I’m below the eye line of most men, and I’ve had men plow right over me on crowded sidewalks or at events. Most men expect the woman to yield in that situation and they’ll get annoyed if you don’t. It actually is surprising when a man moves out of the way, though I don’t know if it shows on my face.
Weird. Imo everyone should yield - that way both parties only have to do a little sidestep and they both feel seen. But I guess caring about others seems to be a dying thing anyways…
Possibly, but could also just be a regional/being an ass thing.
I’m in the Southern US and if you don’t sidestep or flat out get out of the way of someone (not just a woman) with a “pardon me” you’re seen as a jackass.
However, I’ve traveled the world and as a 6 foot tall, 200lb man I got a wide berth when walking down the sidewalks in a lot of countries, have to get out of the way in others, seen people cross the street when they saw me, but then have some 5’ nothing dude with a chip on his shoulder try to start a fight with me for existing in Boston (note this is just a very Boston thing)
I’m in the Southern US and if you don’t sidestep or flat out get out of the way of someone (not just a woman) with a “pardon me” you’re seen as a jackass.
It happens for me way more with men. If a woman bumps into me, she apologizes at least 90% of the time, but I’ve rarely gotten an apology from a man. If I do, then he usually has kids with him.
Your two reasons, being below the eye line and being a woman are incongruent. If you’re below the eye line and they don’t notice you, then how are they expecting you to yield?
A large percentage of women actively prefer many of the behaviors we're describing as "toxic". The majority of my casual partners have explicitly requested, or discussed how attractive they find, borderline abusive behavior: physical aggression, jealousy, catcalling and infantalizing language, relentless pursuit, etc. My first girlfriend told me to be less respectful with her, and lost a lot of attraction toward me the first time I was emotionally vulnerable with her.
So a big problem is that while a vocal portion of women are telling men that certain gender norms are toxic and they need to stop, they're watching the women they're pursuing choose the men who exhibit this toxic behavior. At the end of the day, without any guidance from feminists, they have to choose between what the feminists tell them, and what the pick-up artist types tell them. The pick-up artists promise them romantic success, the feminists call them toxic for feeling entitled to romantic success.
With sexual/romantic success being the primary motivator for young men, is it really a surprise that they make the choices they make?
This is absolutely true and I'm always surprised there isn't more acknowledgement in progressive women's circles. Simple polling shows that roughly a third of women hold all men to these standards but there are significantly more who exclusively apply it to potential partners (speaking from a very US-centric perspective).
The honest solution is that women who think this way are simply not good partners, and should be avoided to whatever degree is possible.
I guess it becomes a matter of strategy. Maybe progressive women aren't the ones who need to hear it the most, and they may feel offended at the suggestion that other women could be part of reinforcing the patriarchy. It mirrors the way men are asked to shut down other mens sexist remarks and actions. I'm sure such behavior is prevalent, but I never witness it. So the question to me is, how do we communicate this whole thing to women as a group? The ones willing to listen aren't the ones who need to hear it, and the ones who need to hear it are probably not willing to listen.
I would disagree that women who think this way ought be discounted any more that you should say "Don't date a man that loves big boobs and can't arrange furniture to save his life".
Ultimately we as a species are stuck with the sex drives we've got. Whilst some effort can be made to rise above them, (and to recognise potential partners who don't) I think we also need to find healthy behaviours that can scratch the same itch as the toxic ones.
Jealousy is fine if stated frankly and honestly, rather than manifesting in surviellance. Relentless pursuit is fine in the framework of formal flirtation, not on a street with stranger. You oughtn't manhandle where uninvited, but it's no sin to be physically fit enough to be capable of it.
There's a confusion happening. I think people are thinking "toxic masculinity" means all masculine traits are toxic, and I feel that's not the case.
It's not that masculine traits are good or bad, it's that they become "toxic" when they become dysfunctional.
For example, a masculine trait is being able to endure hardship, to be kind of stoic. This can be a positive trait when working out, instead of whining to everyone about how heavy weights are you keep going and finish your set. It can be negative when you feel like you can't cry at a funeral, trying to be manly when you're sad.
The solution, in my opinion, isn't to act less manly but embrace other aspects of manliness. Instead of refusing to cry, you can embrace the idea that men will do as they want regardless of the negative opinions and doubts of others, and cry as much as you want at a funeral.
It's not effeminate to cry at a funeral, and is now a manly thing to cry at a funeral.
So yeah, women like masculine traits (at least the women who like men tend to), but they don't like it when people use the excuse of masculine traits hurt them, people around them, or the men they love.
The majority of my casual partners have explicitly requested, or discussed how attractive they find, borderline abusive behavior: physical aggression, jealousy, catcalling and infantalizing language, relentless pursuit, etc.
What they say they want is usually not what they want. Let me take your examples apart:
physical aggression,
The actually attractive thing is being able to hold your own, and be self-directed. Anger and aggression are a pale imitation of that preferred by some women because they've never seen anything off the doormat - douchebag axis. Or, differently put: You can't be peaceful while being harmless. If she prefers a bit of a thrill loom there like a rollercoaster handing out tickles if you dare to get on.
jealousy,
Is a pale imitation of loyalty. It's what passes as attachment in lieu of meaningful connection, as relationship security in lieu of figuring out what both of you want from your own and the other's life.
catcalling
Yes she wants to be considered attractive. She likes compliments. We all do... at least from the right people, in the right situation, for a thing we want to be complimented for. The trick is to be able to mind-read :)
and infantalizing language,
That's about being cared for, having space to not have to care about things, space to stop adulting. If she generally fails at adulting that's a red flag, if she has her shit together, heck, why not, I can make pancakes with happy faces on them.
Honestly, when I was a young male teen on reddit, I internalized a whole bunch of stuff like this, and it's made me uncomfortable around women. I don't want to make anyone uncomfortable, scared, or feel unsafe and combined with a whole lot of self hatred/loathing/negativity in general over a long time basically indelibly etched into my mind that anything remotely romantic with women is not ok.
Please, please, please understand that I'm not being like "woke feminism made me hate women and fucked my life up!" It's just when I was young and my brain was more malleable, it hurt being male when people would talk about men being predators, etc. I wanted to distance myself from that as much as possible, and went so far the other way for so long that it honestly fucked me up mentally. I have other trauma around women that makes it uncomfortable, namely a lot of being asked out as a prank. (There is no good response, if you said yes, then hahaha you fucking loser you actually thought someone would interested in you? If you said no, then you're gay and you should go kill yourself)
I'm no longer male, and now know I'm not straight, but that shit has stuck with me. Sometimes I fear that I'm not actually attracted to men, that I'm just desperate for affection and my brain is broken where dating/intimacy/relationships with women is concerned. (Then a man starts kissing me and it dispells my doubts for a while.)
I don't really know why I'm sharing this. I guess I just wanted to say that while men who are upset at women about women choosing the bear don't get it and are part of the problem, the messaging can have serious impact on people for the worse. Certainly not saying that women shouldn't speak up about it. I think it's natural to be upset about how men are seen in this context, and that that anger is frequently directed at the women speaking up, shooting the messenger so to speak, when it should be directed at the system and society that allows such treatment of women to be commonplace.
Fuck it's too early in the morning and I'm rambling and oversharing. I hope someone finds some value in this word vomit.
Omg, this is exactly why I made this post. Thank you so much for sharing this homie. I think there are plenty of people who share this experience and emotional relationship with the situation and it’s so very important to know that yours is valid as well. 🧡
Men's Liberation
Top