Current Events > Who created this "toxic masculinity" narrative?

(+) Yeah! (+)

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Funbazooka posted...

Pretending that toxic masculinity isn't a core tenet of feminism is not a convincing tactic.

So if you had a son and a daughter and they were playing with your daughters dolls, do think it's perfectly fine to tell your son to stop playing with dolls because they are for girls or do you think its inconsequential that he plays with them and that it's more important that they are developing a bond together? Which one of those scenarios is a feminist agenda in your mind, if either?

There's no point in trying to reason with him. The concept has already been explained in a crystal clear manner several times in this topic. He is not engaging in good faith, he's so focused on being anti-feminazi that he can't or wont see reason and won't stop associating the term with his idea of radical feminism. The word triggers him.
---

wah_wah_wah posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

You can pretty much use your arguments to justify any evil thing you want. I'm sure Pinochet and Reagan and Stalin and whoever else would love that argument that they don't have responsibility, they were simply "indoctrinated" and had no other choice. Those who suffer from them rightfully see this as total bullshit.

You're missing the point. And the fact of the matter is right and wrong are entirely subjective based on a person's upbringing, mental health and a plethora of other factors that lead them to being the people they are. In the nature vs. nurture argument I am a firm believer that both sides play a vital role in who a person becomes.

Is there ever a situation where rape is right? You'd have to be an idiot to believe that. It is not so "subjective" as you'd think. Someone who repeatedly harms others knows exactly what they are doing and they don't care. If you hear a woman screaming and you go "meh subjective"... I mean you're a total idiot.

In my opinion, no there is never a time when mistreating someone is "right," but that doesn't necessarily apply to everyone's line of thought depending on the scenario. What we as a species considers to be the correct way to treat others is constantly changing and we as a species are trending in the right direction most of the time. The fact of the matter is, if you grow up in a scenario where you are constantly taught something is ok or even encouraged, but the rest of the world thinks it's wrong, being told you and everyone you love is wrong is generally going to cause you to be defensive of what you were taught. It doesn't mean you can't come around and see why what you believe is wrong but it certainly makes it harder to just turn your back on everything you grew up believing.
---

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Funbazooka posted...

Pretending that toxic masculinity isn't a core tenet of feminism is not a convincing tactic.

So if you had a son and a daughter and they were playing with your daughters dolls, do think it's perfectly fine to tell your son to stop playing with dolls because they are for girls or do you think its inconsequential that he plays with them and that it's more important that they are developing a bond together? Which one of those scenarios is a feminist agenda in your mind, if either?

The habits of pre-pubescent children isn't relevant to the discussion of masculinity or femininity, since they refer to the qualities and attributes of adults.
---

It's a buzzword to shield them from actually having to discuss things. Instead of discussing the broad nuances of males and females, it's just nothing more than nonsense like "fighting the patriarchy." There might be some areas where discussing the topic can actually lead to productive conversations, but the problem is that such people don't want a conversation. It's the same as "cultural appropriation" in that it is a term that probably does have slight validity that has been turned into utter nonsense.

IfGodCouldDie posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

You can pretty much use your arguments to justify any evil thing you want. I'm sure Pinochet and Reagan and Stalin and whoever else would love that argument that they don't have responsibility, they were simply "indoctrinated" and had no other choice. Those who suffer from them rightfully see this as total bullshit.

You're missing the point. And the fact of the matter is right and wrong are entirely subjective based on a person's upbringing, mental health and a plethora of other factors that lead them to being the people they are. In the nature vs. nurture argument I am a firm believer that both sides play a vital role in who a person becomes.

Is there ever a situation where rape is right? You'd have to be an idiot to believe that. It is not so "subjective" as you'd think. Someone who repeatedly harms others knows exactly what they are doing and they don't care. If you hear a woman screaming and you go "meh subjective"... I mean you're a total idiot.

In my opinion, no there is never a time when mistreating someone is "right," but that doesn't necessarily apply to everyone's line of thought depending on the scenario. What we as a species considers to be the correct way to treat others is constantly changing and we as a species are trending in the right direction most of the time. The fact of the matter is, if you grow up in a scenario where you are constantly taught something is ok or even encouraged, but the rest of the world thinks it's wrong, being told you and everyone you love is wrong is generally going to cause you to be defensive of what you were taught. It doesn't mean you can't come around and see why what you believe is wrong but it certainly makes it harder to just turn your back on everything you grew up believing.

Even if you are taught a certain way, if you go out and harm someone with all of that training, that's on you. We get exposed to thousands of messages every single day, sometimes telling us to do truly horrific things. Yet we have agency. We can make other choices. If you believe that harming others is easier than improving yourself, then the problem is totally you.

wah_wah_wah posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

You can pretty much use your arguments to justify any evil thing you want. I'm sure Pinochet and Reagan and Stalin and whoever else would love that argument that they don't have responsibility, they were simply "indoctrinated" and had no other choice. Those who suffer from them rightfully see this as total bullshit.

You're missing the point. And the fact of the matter is right and wrong are entirely subjective based on a person's upbringing, mental health and a plethora of other factors that lead them to being the people they are. In the nature vs. nurture argument I am a firm believer that both sides play a vital role in who a person becomes.

Is there ever a situation where rape is right? You'd have to be an idiot to believe that. It is not so "subjective" as you'd think. Someone who repeatedly harms others knows exactly what they are doing and they don't care. If you hear a woman screaming and you go "meh subjective"... I mean you're a total idiot.

In my opinion, no there is never a time when mistreating someone is "right," but that doesn't necessarily apply to everyone's line of thought depending on the scenario. What we as a species considers to be the correct way to treat others is constantly changing and we as a species are trending in the right direction most of the time. The fact of the matter is, if you grow up in a scenario where you are constantly taught something is ok or even encouraged, but the rest of the world thinks it's wrong, being told you and everyone you love is wrong is generally going to cause you to be defensive of what you were taught. It doesn't mean you can't come around and see why what you believe is wrong but it certainly makes it harder to just turn your back on everything you grew up believing.

Even if you are taught a certain way, if you go out and harm someone with all of that training, that's on you. We get exposed to thousands of messages every single day, sometimes telling us to do truly horrific things. Yet we have agency. We can make other choices. If you believe that harming others is easier than improving yourself, then the problem is totally you.

Hence why I included mental health as a factor for the decisions people make.
---

Funbazooka posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Funbazooka posted...

Pretending that toxic masculinity isn't a core tenet of feminism is not a convincing tactic.

So if you had a son and a daughter and they were playing with your daughters dolls, do think it's perfectly fine to tell your son to stop playing with dolls because they are for girls or do you think its inconsequential that he plays with them and that it's more important that they are developing a bond together? Which one of those scenarios is a feminist agenda in your mind, if either?

The habits of pre-pubescent children isn't relevant to the discussion of masculinity or femininity, since they refer to the qualities and attributes of adults.

The habits you develop, and the things you are taught while your mind develops are certainly relevant to the rest of your life.
---

legendary_zell posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Funbazooka posted...

Pretending that toxic masculinity isn't a core tenet of feminism is not a convincing tactic.

So if you had a son and a daughter and they were playing with your daughters dolls, do think it's perfectly fine to tell your son to stop playing with dolls because they are for girls or do you think its inconsequential that he plays with them and that it's more important that they are developing a bond together? Which one of those scenarios is a feminist agenda in your mind, if either?

There's no point in trying to reason with him. The concept has already been explained in a crystal clear manner several times in this topic. He is not engaging in good faith, he's so focused on being anti-feminazi that he can't or wont see reason and won't stop associating the term with his idea of radical feminism. The word triggers him.

Again, the irony is very rich here considering that a lot of the points I've brought up over the course of the topic are either glossed over, arbitrarily disregarded, or hell even ignored.
---

legendary_zell posted...

Toxic masculinity doesn't mean that all masculinity is toxic. It means that a specific level or expression of it is toxic. Even good traits can be toxic if they are expressed in the wrong way. This topic is made several times a week on this board and elsewhere on the internet. If you don't get it by now, I don't know what to tell ya.

Incels are a pretty clear example of toxic masculinity. One element of a version of masculinity is to measure yourself through sexual conquests and desirability, they do that to such an extent that they take their lack of desirability as an identity and it warps them into hating women and more successful men. That's a toxic form of masculinity, hence toxic masculinity.

It's what makes guys clown each other for being emotional and makes them bottle everything inside until they explode in anger or fall into depression. That's a trait associated with masculinity and it's def toxic....hence toxic masculinity. That's not attacking all men or disparaging masculinity as a concept.

This is such a good post
---

Funbazooka posted...

legendary_zell posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Funbazooka posted...

Pretending that toxic masculinity isn't a core tenet of feminism is not a convincing tactic.

So if you had a son and a daughter and they were playing with your daughters dolls, do think it's perfectly fine to tell your son to stop playing with dolls because they are for girls or do you think its inconsequential that he plays with them and that it's more important that they are developing a bond together? Which one of those scenarios is a feminist agenda in your mind, if either?

There's no point in trying to reason with him. The concept has already been explained in a crystal clear manner several times in this topic. He is not engaging in good faith, he's so focused on being anti-feminazi that he can't or wont see reason and won't stop associating the term with his idea of radical feminism. The word triggers him.

Again, the irony is very rich here considering that a lot of the points I've brought up over the course of the topic are either glossed over, arbitrarily disregarded, or hell even ignored.

What points are those? Just not them down in point form for simplicity sake
---

There are traits in masculinity that are "toxic" in that they hurt the individual and people around them. I don't think the concept of masculinity in itself is harmful, but it definitely has large faults that need to be addressed and amended. The true virtues need to be properly identified and fostered in all people no matter their gender. A well integrated person would embrace positive virtues that would have traditionally been assigned or expected of a gender and not be worried about what society or their peers think.
---

I'm really not interested in repeating myself. That's so tiresome. You can look back if you want.

Anyway, I'm being pretty reasonable, legendary_zell. I'm just testing and challenging your belief system, seeing if holds up to criticism.

I suspect your beliefs aren't that firmly held if my questions and observations make you so uncomfortable.
---

I didn't say I'd been debating specifically with legendary_zell. I *think* that was the first time I responded to him.

In fact, I was responding to IfGodCouldDie when zell interjected to say I'm just unreasonable and ought to be ignored. He talked some shit so he got some back, that's all.
---

wah_wah_wah posted...

You can pretty much use your arguments to justify any evil thing you want. I'm sure Pinochet and Reagan and Stalin and whoever else would love that argument that they don't have responsibility, they were simply "indoctrinated" and had no other choice. Those who suffer from them rightfully see this as total bullshit.

Did you put Reagan on the same level as Stalin?
---

Funbazooka posted...

I'm really not interested in repeating myself. That's so tiresome. You can look back if you want.

Anyway, I'm being pretty reasonable, legendary_zell. I'm just testing and challenging your belief system, seeing if holds up to criticism.

I suspect your beliefs aren't that firmly held if my questions and observations make you so uncomfortable.

I'm not the one complaining about your points being disregarded or ignored. I'm perfectly fine addressing them if you give me a short list of them, otherwise I don't understand why you'd complain about it if your not willing to have them addressed.
---

Funbazooka posted...

l33t_iRk3n_Rm33 posted...

It's real as fuck. The less power the phrase "You're not a man if _____" has over people, the better off everyone is.

"You're not a good/decent person if _____" is a vastly more prevalent attitude.

Is this not a "toxic" attitude by the same standard?

Nah because there's this crazy thing called 'morals'
---

There's this crazy thing called masculinity? Same difference.
---

Funbazooka posted...

There's this crazy thing called masculinity? Same difference.

No, it's not the same difference. The fact that you think dehumanizing someone for not having masculine traits and suggesting someone's a bad person for not having morals are the same thing speaks volumes about you
---

femininity in men should be discouraged

Funbazooka posted...

There's this crazy thing called masculinity? Same difference.

Not at all. Playing with toys or doing things that are typical of your opposing gender literally means nothing when it comes to how rational people would view you as a person. Stealing, murder, assault, etc. regardless of gender make you a shitty person.
---

I don't know why you people keep responding to someone who is obviously trolling.
---

BLAKUboy posted...

I don't know why you people keep responding to someone who is obviously trolling.

There could be fence sitters that when reading this see good points towards one side vs. trolling and make a decision.
---

BLAKUboy posted...

I don't know why you people keep responding to someone who is obviously trolling.

sadly its pretty much impossible to have an adult conversation on this board about stuff like this
---

i_eat_the_booty posted...

Funbazooka posted...

There's this crazy thing called masculinity? Same difference.

No, it's not the same difference. The fact that you think dehumanizing someone for not having masculine traits and suggesting someone's a bad person for not having morals are the same thing speaks volumes about you

Saying "You're not a good/decent person if you_____" doesn't seek to dehumanize?

You're not a good/decent person if you don't support social justice, comes to mind, as an example. Do SJWs seek to dehumanize their opponents? Of course they do. Adherents of social justice equate it with being a good moral person, yet others recognize social justice warriorism to be a twisted perversion.

Don't mean to go off on a tangent, just an example.
---

"The less power the phrase "You're not a man if _____" has over people, the better off everyone is."

My point here is that recognizing the power of social pressures or expectations exemplified through something like this: "You're not a ___ if you ___"

Isn't enough to be an indictment of a social expectation. That's all.
---

Funbazooka posted...

i_eat_the_booty posted...

Funbazooka posted...

There's this crazy thing called masculinity? Same difference.

No, it's not the same difference. The fact that you think dehumanizing someone for not having masculine traits and suggesting someone's a bad person for not having morals are the same thing speaks volumes about you

Saying "You're not a good/decent person if you_____" doesn't seek to dehumanize?

You're not a good/decent person if you don't support social justice, comes to mind, as an example. Do SJWs seek to dehumanize their opponents? Of course they do. Adherents of social justice equate it with being a good moral person, yet others recognize social justice warriorism to be a twisted perversion.

Don't mean to go off on a tangent, just an example.

Are you saying that fighting for the equal treatment and respect of others is a perversion of something?
---

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Funbazooka posted...

i_eat_the_booty posted...

Funbazooka posted...

There's this crazy thing called masculinity? Same difference.

No, it's not the same difference. The fact that you think dehumanizing someone for not having masculine traits and suggesting someone's a bad person for not having morals are the same thing speaks volumes about you

Saying "You're not a good/decent person if you_____" doesn't seek to dehumanize?

You're not a good/decent person if you don't support social justice, comes to mind, as an example. Do SJWs seek to dehumanize their opponents? Of course they do. Adherents of social justice equate it with being a good moral person, yet others recognize social justice warriorism to be a twisted perversion.

Don't mean to go off on a tangent, just an example.

Are you saying that fighting for the equal treatment and respect of others is a perversion of something?

That's called egalitarianism not social justice. The main difference between the two is that social justice seeks to force outcomes (by punishing and rewarding different demographics) instead of giving everyone equal opportunity through freedom.
---

Its used by people who believe in nurture over nature, as in, men are not inherently masculine and the more aggressive components are learned. Which, I think, is a discredit to the natural tendency of males to be aggressive.

Really, its trying to enforce the idea that you can be what you want to be, which I agree with, but at the cost of gender roles, which I think are biological. A large part of growing up is discovering yourself, and people who devote a lot of energy attempting to define or redefine masculinity are insecure. There is nothing wrong with being a meek and/or emotional guy, but it isnt masculine and thats okay.
---

Funbazooka posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Funbazooka posted...

i_eat_the_booty posted...

Funbazooka posted...

There's this crazy thing called masculinity? Same difference.

No, it's not the same difference. The fact that you think dehumanizing someone for not having masculine traits and suggesting someone's a bad person for not having morals are the same thing speaks volumes about you

Saying "You're not a good/decent person if you_____" doesn't seek to dehumanize?

You're not a good/decent person if you don't support social justice, comes to mind, as an example. Do SJWs seek to dehumanize their opponents? Of course they do. Adherents of social justice equate it with being a good moral person, yet others recognize social justice warriorism to be a twisted perversion.

Don't mean to go off on a tangent, just an example.

Are you saying that fighting for the equal treatment and respect of others is a perversion of something?

That's called egalitarianism not social justice. The main difference between the two is that social justice seeks to force outcomes (by punishing and rewarding different demographics) instead of giving everyone equal opportunity through freedom.

That's is about as true as feminism's goal is to metaphorically castrate all men.
---

EnragedSlith posted...

Its used by people who believe in nurture over nature, as in, men are not inherently masculine and the more aggressive components are learned. Which, I think, is a discredit to the natural tendency of males to be aggressive.

Really, its trying to enforce the idea that you can be what you want to be, which I agree with, but at the cost of gender roles, which I think are biological. A large part of growing up is discovering yourself, and people who devote a lot of energy attempting to define or redefine masculinity are insecure. There is nothing wrong with being a meek and/or emotional guy, but it isnt masculine and thats okay.

Okay, so how do you define masculinity?
---

I wonder how many guys that whine about "toxic masculinity" are virgins who got their asses kicked a lot growing up.
---

TheCyborgNinja posted...

I wonder how many guys that whine about "toxic masculinity" are virgins who got their asses kicked a lot growing up.

the vast majority.

TheCyborgNinja posted...

I wonder how many guys that whine about "toxic masculinity" are virgins who got their asses kicked a lot growing up.

What is your definition of toxic masculinity?
---

IfGodCouldDie posted...

TheCyborgNinja posted...

I wonder how many guys that whine about "toxic masculinity" are virgins who got their asses kicked a lot growing up.

What is your definition of toxic masculinity?

It's the completely made up notion that any amount of masculine expression is oppressive to women and harmful to both genders.
---

TheCyborgNinja posted...

I wonder how many guys that whine about "toxic masculinity" are virgins who got their asses kicked a lot growing up.

The people whining about the existence of the concept? Probably all of them.
---

Howl posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

TheCyborgNinja posted...

I wonder how many guys that whine about "toxic masculinity" are virgins who got their asses kicked a lot growing up.

What is your definition of toxic masculinity?

It's the completely made up notion that any amount of masculine expression is oppressive to women and harmful to both genders.

Lol

Even after countless posts itt explaining that's not what it means you still tout this garbage

You guys aren't even interested in being educated. You're just here to bitch about feminism and how "they're taking over the world"
---

i_eat_the_booty posted...

Howl posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

TheCyborgNinja posted...

I wonder how many guys that whine about "toxic masculinity" are virgins who got their asses kicked a lot growing up.

What is your definition of toxic masculinity?

It's the completely made up notion that any amount of masculine expression is oppressive to women and harmful to both genders.

Lol

Even after countless posts itt explaining that's not what it means you still tout this garbage

You guys aren't even interested in being educated. You're just here to bitch about feminism and how "they're taking over the world"

There's no further education required. "Toxic Masculinity" isn't even a real thing. It's just a buzz phrase.
---

i_eat_the_booty posted...

Howl posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

TheCyborgNinja posted...

I wonder how many guys that whine about "toxic masculinity" are virgins who got their asses kicked a lot growing up.

What is your definition of toxic masculinity?

It's the completely made up notion that any amount of masculine expression is oppressive to women and harmful to both genders.

Lol

Even after countless posts itt explaining that's not what it means you still tout this garbage

You guys aren't even interested in being educated. You're just here to bitch about feminism and how "they're taking over the world"

thats how most people use it. just because you have your own definition doesn't change the facts

No, that isn't how most people use it. This topic, and pretty much a simple google search are evidence of that.

It's precisely like I outlined in the first post; it's just instant outrage. Just like with the term 'white privilege'. You guys just read those two words and immediately think it means you can't have setbacks because you're white.
---

i_eat_the_booty posted...

Just like with the term 'white privilege'. You guys just read those two words and immediately think it means you can't have setbacks because you're white.

no, I don't

you're assuming things.

i_eat_the_booty posted...

No, that isn't how most people use it. This topic, and pretty much a simple google search are evidence of that.

http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Toxic_masculinity
It refers to the socially-constructed attitudes that describe the masculine gender role as violent, unemotional, sexually aggressive, and so forth.

A well-known masculinity/men's rights movement that is not mostly anti-feminist has yet to appear. For a silencing tactic used to discredit patriarchy's harm to people who are not men, see Patriarchy hurts men too.

second result

Howl posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

TheCyborgNinja posted...

I wonder how many guys that whine about "toxic masculinity" are virgins who got their asses kicked a lot growing up.

What is your definition of toxic masculinity?

It's the completely made up notion that any amount of masculine expression is oppressive to women and harmful to both genders.

So you don't know what toxic masculinity refers to then, got it.
---

Howl posted...

i_eat_the_booty posted...

Howl posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

TheCyborgNinja posted...

I wonder how many guys that whine about "toxic masculinity" are virgins who got their asses kicked a lot growing up.

What is your definition of toxic masculinity?

It's the completely made up notion that any amount of masculine expression is oppressive to women and harmful to both genders.

Lol

Even after countless posts itt explaining that's not what it means you still tout this garbage

You guys aren't even interested in being educated. You're just here to bitch about feminism and how "they're taking over the world"

There's no further education required. "Toxic Masculinity" isn't even a real thing. It's just a buzz phrase.

If you don't think it's a real thing I refer you to my previous example of your hypothetical son playing with your hypothetical daughter and they are playing with her dolls. How do you handle that situation?
---

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Howl posted...

i_eat_the_booty posted...

Howl posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

TheCyborgNinja posted...

I wonder how many guys that whine about "toxic masculinity" are virgins who got their asses kicked a lot growing up.

What is your definition of toxic masculinity?

It's the completely made up notion that any amount of masculine expression is oppressive to women and harmful to both genders.

Lol

Even after countless posts itt explaining that's not what it means you still tout this garbage

You guys aren't even interested in being educated. You're just here to bitch about feminism and how "they're taking over the world"

There's no further education required. "Toxic Masculinity" isn't even a real thing. It's just a buzz phrase.

If you don't think it's a real thing I refer you to my previous example of your hypothetical son playing with your hypothetical daughter and they are playing with her dolls. How do you handle that situation?

do nothing

Toxic masculinity =/= Masculinity is toxic

Does "red car" mean all cars are red? If cars only came in red, would you even need to qualify "car"?
---

Aki_Narukami posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Howl posted...

i_eat_the_booty posted...

Howl posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

TheCyborgNinja posted...

I wonder how many guys that whine about "toxic masculinity" are virgins who got their asses kicked a lot growing up.

What is your definition of toxic masculinity?

It's the completely made up notion that any amount of masculine expression is oppressive to women and harmful to both genders.

Lol

Even after countless posts itt explaining that's not what it means you still tout this garbage

You guys aren't even interested in being educated. You're just here to bitch about feminism and how "they're taking over the world"

There's no further education required. "Toxic Masculinity" isn't even a real thing. It's just a buzz phrase.

If you don't think it's a real thing I refer you to my previous example of your hypothetical son playing with your hypothetical daughter and they are playing with her dolls. How do you handle that situation?

do nothing

And that's great, but anyone that comes in and tells their son that dolls are for girls and to stop playing with them is an example of toxic masculinity.
---

Again, stop taking the bait. We are well past the point of "reasonable onlookers" needing to be convinced.
---

If toxic masculinity is fake feminist noise, how do you explain how spree killing is an almost exclusively male phenomenon?

BLAKUboy posted...

Again, stop taking the bait. We are well past the point of "reasonable onlookers" needing to be convinced.

Why do you care how people spend their free time? If I choose to continue talking to a brick wall, that's my decision.
---