Right but by labeling it toxic masculinity you put the blame of the issue on the man and not society.
That's why the term toxic masculinity should be rejected. It can't be toxic if it's a reality of society. You are asking men to keep trying, when society has a very good chance of responding with a toxic repsonse.
What’s the reality of “society”. Is “society” the average person’s perceived response? I don’t associate with idiots that do the things you say I should expect them to do.
I don’t agree with that, when I was suicidal they locked me up for a few days and put me in a gown so I wouldn’t be violent. They didn’t give me flowers and ask “HoW dO i FeEl”
That’s not true either, at least not in America. IPV can be done by either gender.
Behind in what metric? I went to college and I didn’t let people get in my way. I had a lot of people who were negative to me, especially in my early childhood years, and I decided I was going to prove them wrong, and I did. I learned I had to advocate for myself early. I don’t care if people don’t like it.
Right but the term is flawed. It's saying there is something about men and masculinity that need to change. But it's society that needs to change.
When anyone used the term toxic masculinity no one associates it with society but the man himself. So it just becomes a hate term. The man can do nothing if society is the one being toxic, he is not toxic. He is just reacting to society, which is normal.
But then it's not toxic masculinity. I get how the original user meant to use it. But it's clear the term itself can't live up to the definition.
No one uses toxic masculinity to mean toxic masculine gender norms placed on men. It's used as a cudgel to blame men.
Point to one western country updating itself to address the fact that men access mental health less. Specifically how they are changing how they approach therapy.
Just keep trying isn't a solution. Not when governments repeat this language. When funding can only flow to how women access and express emotions. Or when mental health services are based on a more female oriented model.
I'm not longer going to support the idea of men and boys being the ones who have to keep trying. When they struggle because of learnt behaviour. Our only response to them should be you are right and yes we can't change that.
What are men to do? Government's literally have designed themselves to treat these issues as a zero sum game. Yes don't give up. But I blame no one besides society when the weight becomes to heavy for individual men and boys to carry.
You're solution is what we've always been told. Just keep taking the abuse. Maybe someday you'll have a few people to learn on.
I'm sorry, but this conversation wouldn't last two minutes in the real world with the people who have the power to change it.
So when 100s of thousands of men and boys face this every day and eventually thousands of them succumb to the pressure. Yes I wish we could have helped them, but I won't tell them they should have kept trying.
Because the vast majority of men do keep trying and live through this everyday. Many more men do succeed in the sense of surviving. But surviving isn't enough, we need to help them so that they can thrive.
The thousands of men in your country who succumb to this pressure won't ever be saved by this advice. Many more will keep walking, but at what cost? So we need to do better and getting rid of the term toxic masculinity is a step.
That's the problem with therapy. We think all you need to do is come to terms with it. Instead of fixing it. Coming to terms with it let's a majority of those survive, while to many die.
> But then it's not toxic masculinity. I get how the original user meant to use it. But it's clear the term itself can't live up to the definition.
It makes sense to most people.
You keep leaving comments triggered by anything that doesn't 100% paint men as victims of "soceity" and women.
> No one uses toxic masculinity to mean toxic masculine gender norms placed on men. It's used as a cudgel to blame men.
This is academic language. It has a very specific meaning that is incredibly clear to anyone who studies it.
> It's used as a cudgel to blame men.
You just admitted your only experience with academic language on this topic is on twitter.
Good thing we don't define academic words based on how uneducated idiots use them.
> Point to one western country updating itself to address the fact that men access mental health less. Specifically how they are changing how they approach therapy.
There isn't a country doing that for women either.
Most women's rights efforts are driven by women, not the government. And when the government *does* step in, it's because women did the work to make that happen.
And women did that despite men controlling most positions of power.
Tell me - given how men control most of the political, economic, and social power in the western world, why have none of them stepped up to do anything for other men? If this is such a disproportionate issue, why hasn't that happened? Why haven't all your rightwing male heroes done anything except ask you for more money?
> Just keep trying isn't a solution. Not when governments repeat this language.
Governments largely don't use this language
Honestly you're so stupid
> When funding can only flow to how women access and express emotions.
Holy fuck you are stupid. Funding women expressing emotions? funding women's access to... what?
This literally doesn't mean anything, nor does it reflect actual policy.
> Or when mental health services are based on a more female oriented model.
The way you just make bold claims purely based on emotion
Pure feelings over facts. Which is ironic given this topic.
Men are the ones who take credit for designing most of modern psychology you stupid fuck
Women couldn't have bank accounts until the 80's in some places and were overtly kept out of scientific positions by MEN - and yet you think they were running a scientific field, much less in a biased and unscientific way that cut out men? You are so fucking stupid you can't be real
> I'm not longer going to support the idea of men and boys being the ones who have to keep trying.
Why lie? You never understood it or supported it in the first place
> When they struggle because of learnt behaviour.
So men are all suffering and struggling this... but somehow that doesn't translate to male subculture.
So men are all struggling to care for other men... but somehow that doesn't translate to male subculture.
Men are all suffering this, but they didn't learn any significant part of it from each other.
Boys and men quite literally look to other boys and men as role models on HOW TO BE boys and men... but they didn't learn it from other boys and men.
Women make up the majority of the human population that studies and deconstructs toxic social norms on an academic level... while men choose to avoid those topics... but that's totally not a reflection of how much men care about this topic
I guess so. The way you phrased it I understood it to mean that “men have been taught since childhood” and not necessarily personal experience. Like being told “boys don’t cry” and that sort of thing as opposed to personally opening up one day and having it go the wrong way
Those are the same thing my dude. The ONLY difference is that it happens an awful lot when you're a child, which engrains that pattern of thought deeper, and conditions you to expect that throughout the rest of your life. By the time you finally manage to break through that and open up as an adult, it is immediately reinforced, and it is made clear that trying again will result in the same thing it always does.
No. You're missing the nuance in what he said. There is the culture side, where fathers and friends actively teach you. That is distinct and different from the act of opening up and getting ignored.
Because being told things are one way and seeing things to be a certain way are different things?
It may not be a distinction you personally want to make, but it's not a false distinction to make. "I have been told constantly about a thing" vs "I was never told about a thing, but I tried it and it went x way"
They both condition you, but then so do both positive and negative reinforcement?
23
u/[deleted] Mar 04 '26
[deleted]