Patriarchy
You know the thing that bugs me the most about social patriarchy is the same thing that really gets me about anti-apologetics. There is the notion that there needs to be this unilateral action of sorts and straying from it shows weakness of sorts. It's not uncommon to hear conservative and traditionalist indicate that admitting wrong is a sign of weakness. And the reality is that we learn best from our own mistakes. Trail and error is an incredible teaching tool.
Patriarchy goes against what we actually know about how human beings learn things. It goes against the nothing of taking multiple inputs to come to a conclusion. It goes against the process of being well informed. It's these absolutes within this kind of system that give rise to the various toxic behaviors. I think if men actually sit there and actually listen to women and allow women to participate in decisive action, men will learn infinitely way more.
Men need feminism too
Exactly. Good objective thinking relies on taking all input and being able to share executive action. Humans aren't stronger than a bear, we're not faster than a cheetah, and hell we don't live nearly as long as most trees. The quality that humans have that places them above all else, is thinking and reasoning. And we do better at that quality by broadening our horizons not limiting them. The whole wild arguments of "well male lobsters assert dominance…". Lobsters or whatever animal a particular someone who I won't name tries to parallel us with, they don't reason and think in any remote sense the same way as humans. It's silly to try and take some biological aspect of our species or other species and draw a conclusion about how we should use the thing that makes humans, human.
But that is just my hot take on this.
SwingingKoala@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
Ah yes, let’s use a gendered term to refer to behavior that’s not ok in either gender, because calling the general term for male attributes toxic will make young men feel welcome. Yes, I’m aware what “toxic masculinity” refers to.
Ilandar@aussie.zone 1 year ago
If you know what it refers to then why complain? Why pretend this is some big attack on masculinity as a whole when it’s obviously not? Toxic is an adjective, it is used to separate the bad stereotypical attributes of masculinity from the good. No one is suggesting these behaviours can only exist in men and I don’t know why you’re so offended by the use of gendered words when we are specifically talking about problems associated with one gender. Enough with the manufactured outrage, engage in good faith for once.
Neato@kbin.social 1 year ago
I've seen this from men recently here. They are attacking words like "feminism" and "toxic masculinity" with crap like this. It's because they know they have no real arguments against them that they go for ad hominem attacks. They hate the word "feminism" because they'd rather have equality for "all" and imply feminism is equality for women only. Now this dude is attacking "toxic masculinity" because "women can be toxic, too" apparently. As if it wasn't coined because the predominance was found in men and was trying to call attention to issues men face. It's just a new tact in misogyny.
Ilandar@aussie.zone 1 year ago
You’re right, it is a common tactic from the right to just immediately present any given social issue as an “attack on X”. But I also think instantly lumping people into that group isn’t always helpful either, which is why I asked for that person to chill with the hysteria and actually elaborate on their point. Unfortunately they are clearly intent on divisiveness and meaningless point scoring, so at that point you can hardly blame us for assuming the worst of their intentions.
SwingingKoala@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
Following that logic, should we stick to gender markings in job titles when jobs are predominantly performed by one gender?
SwingingKoala@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
Did you even read the headline for this post?
Which relevance does my understanding have to the understanding of a 12 year old boy?
Ilandar@aussie.zone 1 year ago
Rather than make snarky, half-arsed replies why not take the time to articulate why you think “toxic masculinity” is such a problematic term? Why not engage in good faith with other people instead of instantly trying to turn this into yet another polarised yawnfest argument?
Neato@kbin.social 1 year ago
Men get so bent out of shape whenever they even could be considered at fault for anything.
Meanwhile the word hysteria exists...
CTdummy@artemis.camp 1 year ago
No, people get bent out of shape because it’s a gendered, sexist term. End of story. Just like man-splaining. You can discuss male specific toxicity and men being condescending without using terms that very clearly are divisive and prejudicial.
If you use the terms while pretending to be progressive or for equality then you’re a liar and a hypocrite. Hope that helps.
Neato@kbin.social 1 year ago
It doesn't. Because this is a misogynist talking point. But you know that. That's your goal.
SwingingKoala@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
Not sure what you’re trying to say. That the word hysteria exists is bad… because it assigned a certain behavior/emotion to women? And because of that assigning a certain behavior/emotion to men is something we should welcome?
Neato@kbin.social 1 year ago
You should look up the origin then. Because your clearly concern trolling at this point.
flathead@quex.cc 1 year ago
to be fair, the article specifically references “toxic males” and is focused on the challenges for young men in particular. What seems obviously lacking in the story is any reference to the diminished economic potential that all young people face. 30 years ago education and housing were somewhat reasonably priced and and generally available to all. Economic stress is a huge factor and immediate source of stress and anxiety that is completely ignored in the article. How is one supposed to feel ‘cocky’ while struggling to keep their head above water financially?