Debating the existence of toxic masculinity/femininity

More
5 years 2 months ago - 5 years 2 months ago #332875 by Rosalyn J
To be clear:

Gender roles and expessions are defined by society for the most part. There a certain, very harmful ways in which we either:

Demonstrate to another person that they dont measure up

And/or exaggerate the way in which we can/do

https://www.reddit.com/r/gatekeeping/?utm_source=amp&utm_medium=post_header

Its immaterial whether you have seen/experienced this. Its only that it has been experienced which matters.

Looking out for behavior that is toxic to work that out is really important.

And also, I want to know what "your time of the month has to do with this conversation, Kyrin?

Whenever I have had that line used with me, Ive found it disrespectful. Maybe it means something different for you?

Pax Per Ministerium
[img



Last edit: 5 years 2 months ago by Rosalyn J.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Avalon, Kobos

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
5 years 2 months ago #332876 by OB1Shinobi

rugadd wrote: It really just boils down to people being inconsiderate, selfish, or unnecessarily violent. I don't think genders even really exist outside of people believing they do. But then again, en aweful lot has been done just because someone believed it...

One may be right, but that won't stop them from getting lynched by the people who are wrong.



I do think genders exist outside of people believing they do but i like and agree with everything else.

People are complicated.
The following user(s) said Thank You: rugadd, Kobos

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
5 years 2 months ago #332877 by
I’m not smart enough to say whether or not what the social scientist says is objective or specific enough for y’all.

But, like most social things, it’s really a description not a property. Gender is a description. And, yes, made up. Does that make it any less real?

And yeah, it does serve an agenda, like every single thing we’ve ever done as a species. Everybody has goals, everybody has biases.

I’m sorry I can’t be of more help to the discussion.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
5 years 2 months ago - 5 years 2 months ago #332879 by OB1Shinobi

Rosalyn J wrote: To be clear:

Gender roles and expessions are defined by society for the most part.



For exactly how much part? How is this measured, the difference between what is biological and what is “defined by society”?

What about trans people, who typically report that they always felt themselves to be the “other” gender? Much like sexual orientation, If gender expression was primarily the result of social influence and did not have a biological basis then trans people shouldnt exist.

Here is Robert Sapowlski, a biology professor and an actual scientist (not a “social scientist”) talking about the brain structure (aka the biology) of trans persons.

Warning: Spoiler!



“Born that way” is a biological argument. If you were born a certain way, it wasnt socially conditioned. If it was socially conditioned, you werent born that way. If its all social conditioning then theres no reason we couldnt OR SHOULDNT develop social RE-conditioning protocols (which we would call “treatments”) to reverse the conditioned responses of being gay or transgendered. That a person was born this way is actually a much stronger defense of the basic human right to be who we are than the argument that we are who we are because of social conditioning.

People are complicated.
Last edit: 5 years 2 months ago by OB1Shinobi.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
5 years 2 months ago #332880 by Rosalyn J
I couldn't tell you the difference between what is social and what is biological. That's the classic nature/nuture debate.

I wouldn't be able to speak on the experience of trans* individuals as I am not trans and don't know enough about that group.

I do see where you are going. So I'll concede my points

Pax Per Ministerium
[img



The following user(s) said Thank You: OB1Shinobi, Kobos

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
5 years 2 months ago #332881 by Manu
Nidavellir? That's a made up word!
- All words are made up
(Thor, Infinity War)


Yes, “toxic masculinity” is a made up concept. What matters most is what it points towards. In this case, it is not meant to demonize all men (even if some SJW might want to). It is meant to describe the fact that societies have a tendency to identify some traits as typical male values/behavior, and that some (not all) of these traits are destructive to men or to those around them, but remain unchanged because they are assumed to be the way “a man acts”, and thus not realized as a possible source for justifying destructive (a.k.a. Toxic) behavior.

This is a real thing.

Maybe in the US you are more “woke” than in my little third world corner of a country, but it is still very common for men to commit suicide by violence or by drink because they never learned to express emotions in a healthy fashion, and each time they did try they got beaten up by their father.

I have had various women tell me that I am too “much like a girl” only because I am much more in touch with my feelings.


I’ve had many friends who were taken at age 13 by their fathers to a brothel, to teach them to “be a man”.

I’ve had many a friend look down upon other men who “allowed their women” to go out on their own, reinforcing the idea that they are property, or subpar, not equals.

I’ve even overheard in casual conversation that many acquaintances believe that they have the RIGHT to KILL their wife if they cheat on them, but at the same time, they as men have the right to have sex with whomever they like, as long as they don’t neglect providing for their family.

Because “that’s what men do”.

Men are not evil.

Masculinity has many facets, some of which perpetuate a skewed view of the world and is destructive, to themselves and to others.

Whether some people want to use the term “toxic masculinity” to push their agenda (anti-men, ultraneofemism, etc.) is unfortunate. But it does not negate that this is a real thing.

At least in my neck of the woods.

The pessimist complains about the wind;
The optimist expects it to change;
The realist adjusts the sails.
- William Arthur Ward
The following user(s) said Thank You: Avalon, OB1Shinobi, Kobos

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
5 years 2 months ago - 5 years 2 months ago #332891 by

OB1Shinobi wrote: The argument is that it constitutes a culture because it was extremely pervasive to the film industry, that he was likely only the most well known case but hardly the only case, that it went on for decades, and that everyone knew about it and accepted it without challenge.


Much of the inflammatory language you are using is just false however. Extremely pervasive is a subjective term that can mean anything the reader wants it to mean. Because so many fought to expose him shows me it’s just as extremely pervasive that the film industry fights against this sort of abuse. The devil is in the details when it comes to these sorts of things. You will find examples of abuse in any and every social group like this that exists.

But In fact it is not the group that is to blame, it is simply individual positions of power that are corrupted. In the case of Harvey he fought an ever growing tide of accusers and those trying to expose him for years. However he was extremely effective at avoiding such things. He used his power to hire security groups like Krull and Black Rock to intimidate and blackmail a lot of people and to cover up his crimes. In the end though the tide washed over him and he was exposed. So the idea that he was never challenged is just false.



OB1Shinobi wrote: Even better. Catholic Church proves the validity of the concept of a male dominated, rape culture.


I would agree on this point. The Catholic Church is definitely an example of a rape culture, however it is not an example of toxic masculinity. If anything it’s an example of “toxic homosexual pedophilia”. You see how stupid that term sounds right? Well toxic masculinity is just as stupid a term because it describes a thing that is just dumb to try and assert exists. The idea being that because there is actually no such thing as good homosexual pedophilia the second term implies there is no such thing as good masculinity. The word masculinity itself implies that females are excluded from violent actions and all of that is just false.


OB1Shinobi wrote: Now thats getting into tricky territory. A culture has formal, explicit laws but also informal, implicit cultural norms. The idea of "rape culture" is that there is an implicit cultural norm of allowing men to sexually abuse and exploit women, even if there are formal laws against the behavior.


I agree to an extent. There needs to be some formal standards and typical reactions to the abuses that define the culture as a rape culture. For example the Catholic Church is a rape culture because when those abuses happened they were covered up to the highest degrees. The leaders of the church move priests around and they lie and deny accusations and pay off victims and use their authority and the gullibility of believers against them. Priests are punished on occasion but everything is handled in house under their own rules and never given over to the authorities. That is a rape culture.

The Christian Bible societies were rape cultures as well. The God of the bible is one of the most abusive assholes to ever exist and the cultures that formed around him were the same way. Women were property. If they did not cry out when being raped they got stoned to death, and if they did cry out then the rapist just had to pay the father a bit of money and he’s got to marry her and he’s good to go! There are examples of fathers sending his virgin daughters out into the street to be raped by an angry mob so he may protect other men in his house. Females got involved in this too! Incest was committed as well by women getting their father drunk and coercing him into sex with them. That is a rape culture!
Last edit: 5 years 2 months ago by .

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
5 years 2 months ago - 5 years 2 months ago #332892 by

rugadd wrote: I don't think genders even really exist outside of people believing they do.


All of the vaginas and penises of the world would disagree with you.

Connor L. wrote: Gender is a description. And, yes, made up.


Gender is a description of physical and physiological attributes of the body. They are different and they are not made up, they are based on physical evidence and biological function. You cant be born a male and just decide to be female. That's like being born human and then just deciding your a cat.
Last edit: 5 years 2 months ago by .

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
5 years 2 months ago - 5 years 2 months ago #332893 by Carlos.Martinez3
So, have we as a society, grown out of the * edit: sexual label of male and female and have not realized we have ? Or does that label still linger? Toxicity is tocicity - no matter the label.

Pastor of Temple of the Jedi Order
pastor@templeofthejediorder.org
Build, not tear down.
Nosce te ipsum / Cerca trova
Last edit: 5 years 2 months ago by Carlos.Martinez3.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Kobos

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
5 years 2 months ago #332895 by

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: So, have we as a society grown out of the center label and have not realized we have ? Or does that label still linger? Toxicity is tocicity - no matter the label.



I dont think anyone knows what your talking about. What is "center label"??

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Moderators: ZerokevlarVerheilenChaotishRabeRiniTavi