Gee, I told you all this would happen...

[mjr]

Now "Traditional Masculinity" is dangerous.

I don't know what the AMA defines as "masculine".

I guess it's some pencil-thin dude with a pony tail wearing yoga pants and drinking a soy-based beverage.

https://www.usnews.com/news/national...sociation-says

[Canarr]

I'm a bit torn on this topic, to be honest.

On the one hand, harmful stereotypes of masculinity exist ("boys don't cry" and crap like that), so there is a point in recognizing and combating that. On the other hand, these guidelines seem focused on a very narrow area of research into masculinity - namely, feminist research, which is often biased.

I mean, they quote the Duluth model, for crying out loud, which still regards domestic violence as a matter of male perpetrators and female victims, without considering newer research that indicates domestic violence is often reciprocal. And they blame sexism in career choices for the imbalances in male- or female-dominated careers.

Basically, the idea here is good - help men overcome their problems in life by helping them overcome harmful stereotypes - but if the guidelines are rooted too deeply in ideological convictions, rather than objective studies, I worry that even more harm can be done.

[Talon]

Gee, I told you all this would happen...

Be careful not to choke on your own smug there, sparky.

[Greenday]

Yes, most of the stuff that are considered traditional masculine qualities also fall under toxic. Not sure why this is a big deal. Anything that encourages someone to act like a shitty human being just to try to live up to a stereotype is toxic.

[Gravekeeper]

Now "Traditional Masculinity" is dangerous.

I don't know what the AMA defines as "masculine".

I guess it's some pencil-thin dude with a pony tail wearing yoga pants and drinking a soy-based beverage.

https://www.usnews.com/news/national...sociation-says

Maybe try reading past the headline and your own bias.

[D_Yeti_Esquire]

I'm honestly surprised you went that far mjr without just using the phrase "soy boy."

Regarding the APA - it is and always has been an organization with political aspects to it and you can hunt down the history of gender dysmorphia, depression, or any number of individual topics and how they've changed over the years. I'm not thrilled with this with this largely because it conflates "masculinity" with "socialization" and I believe these are fundamentally divorced topics.

Anyway, I'm going to drop breadcrumbs for whomever haven't seen the following. First on the topic of Toxic Masculinity I present Michael Ian Black who while discussing the same topics is pretty much with me on how "toxic masculinity" as a phrase is largely unhelpful (second clip).

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/21/o...ings-guns.html
https://www.wnycstudios.org/story/bo...ng-masculinity

Next I want to post Contra-points (Natalie Wynn's) video on Jordan Peterson which I think actually hits on a major aspect of Toxic Masculinity as a discussion - "traditional masculinity" appears to be the only thing that still has a model hence you see it as something epitomized by Jordan. While it may have a cornucopia of problems with it, it competes with a lack of model or one that is largely defined on how it doesn't oppress others. So for all the good points the APA might be making, without a better "model" and one that is aspiration rather than what you do not do, you sort of have this nebulous space where really anti-women ideologies dominate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LqZdkkBDas

That is "is not traditional" is not something that works by itself - there has to be some model for those boys who do tend to seek archetypes more. So you end up with this really weird schism between an archetype most men can never achieve and emotionally scar themselves to achieve, and another one that doesn't exist, provides no positive feedback, and in many ways is defined by what it doesn't do.

[Gravekeeper]

<snip>

The APA does not use the phrase "toxic masculinity" anywhere in the guidelines. This is why I was telling mjr to read past the headline. The guidelines also are "aspiration" as you put it. They are not just a list of Things To Not Do(tm). I suggest perhaps reading the guidelines before delving into this.

Also, Jordan Peterson is a human garbage fire. That's not really suppose to be any kind of input on your post. I just feel compelled to point that out whenever I hear his name. -.-

[Canarr]

Also, Jordan Peterson is a human garbage fire. That's not really suppose to be any kind of input on your post. I just feel compelled to point that out whenever I hear his name. -.-

I disagree.

[Talon]

Also, Jordan Peterson is a human garbage fire.

I don't know if I'd go that far. Then again I'm not very familiar with Peterson.
Because I've so far been unable to stomach him for more than a few minutes. Everything I've seen just screams "poser", all style and no substance. A man who says nothing in as many big words as he can.

[Gravekeeper]

I disagree.

That is your prerogative.

I don't know if I'd go that far. Then again I'm not very familiar with Peterson.
Because I've so far been unable to stomach him for more than a few minutes. Everything I've seen just screams "poser", all style and no substance. A man who says nothing in as many big words as he can.

That's essentially my problem with him. He uses disingenuous framing under the guise of being an intellectual in order to push sexism and fundamentalist bullshit.

[gremcint]

to be frank it's basically the exact tactics of twitter trolls where it's basically say something to invoke a reaction and get attention, have us gather a bunch of evidence to counter him investing all kinds of emotional labor only for him to turn around and just dismiss it and either restate what we've refuted or move on to a more ridiculous stance.

There's no point in arguing with him, he's never going to change his mind, he is just trying to get us to waste a bunch of time so he can then feel superior while dismissing our arguments out of hand.

there is a video series called the alt right playbook that analyzes the strategies employed by the altright and this one is specifically relevant. https://youtu.be/CaPgDQkmqqM?list=PL...ANnTnzkA_HMFtQ

[Gravekeeper]

to be frank it's basically the exact tactics of twitter trolls where it's basically say something to invoke a reaction and get attention, have us gather a bunch of evidence to counter him investing all kinds of emotional labor only for him to turn around and just dismiss it and either restate what we've refuted or move on to a more ridiculous stance.

There's no point in arguing with him, he's never going to change his mind, he is just trying to get us to waste a bunch of time so he can then feel superior while dismissing our arguments out of hand.

there is a video series called the alt right playbook that analyzes the strategies employed by the altright and this one is specifically relevant. https://youtu.be/CaPgDQkmqqM?list=PL...ANnTnzkA_HMFtQ

I sincerely don't remember the last time I had a serious conversation, debate or even actual argument with someone from the US self identifying as "right wing". It's all this sort of bullshit now. Trump & Co have destroyed rational discourse. Among other things.

[gremcint]

I sincerely don't remember the last time I had a serious conversation, debate or even actual argument with someone from the US self identifying as "right wing". It's all this sort of bullshit now. Trump & Co have destroyed rational discourse. Among other things.

they claim to want it but every time someone tries.....

[catcul]

they claim to want it but every time someone tries.....

...it's fake news.

Also, if they're presented with an unpleasant truth, they hide under the bed.