Masculinity

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

3 hours ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

This may or may not be relevant, but are any of you familiar with the work of Davis Buss? He's an evolutionary psychologist who has written reams on why we've evolved the way we have, and why men and women think and act differently--and it's because we experience different things. For example, men will never know how it feels to be pregnant and go through childbirth and nursing a baby, along with all the other risks and dilemmas that come with that vulnerability. So we looked for mates who would stick around and help us out until the kids were old enough to fend for themselves at age 7 (hence the 7 year itch). Men, on the other hand, could never know for sure whether or not a child was actually his (until very, very recently), so they evolved short term mating strategies to pass on their genes to more children. 

That's the way it's been for eons, and it's not limited to humans but to most other species in one form or another. 

I'm all for feminism, but there are some things that I don't think the trend towards gender neutral will ever change. I don't think, in the end, that we'll ever have a true gender neutral world. Cultural norms won't change that much, and as one poster said, he and his wife fell into a traditional marriage against their best efforts. From a biological standpoint, hormones won't allow it, especially testosterone.

I'm always a little confused by the term "gender neutral" anyway. I understand what it means, I'm just not sure how it should be applied. I am a woman. I can't say I've ever identified as a male in any way, shape or form...although when we were growing up if none of the girls were around we played with Tonka trucks and played Army with the boys. Does that count?

I think what some people mean by "toxic masculinity" is men who are upset about the power structure and roles being upended--women in particular are filling roles like breadwinner, and they think that means THEIR rights must necessarily be stripped in order to give women equality at home or in the workplace. There's nothing as frightening to them as a woman who is not only independent of them, but doesn't need them for security--and that falls squarely within Buss' hypothesis. Men brought home the bacon and acted as protector, not only for the woman but for her children--for hundreds of thousands of years because women were too vulnerable (pregnancy, very young children) to bring home their own. It doesn't work that way any more, and you can't change evolution and social conditioning that quickly. In other words, women have changed. Some men haven't. 

That being said, what exactly is masculinity? To me, it's being a decent human being first and foremost. Further than that, I can't answer except to say that there are traits shared by both men and women, and men shouldn't be demonized for being emotional or compassionate, any more than women should be excoriated for being strong and intelligent. 

Great post. I do think it will never be possible to be truly gender neutral, well possibly until technology or genetic meddling means that we don't really have genders.

Until then I think that on the whole men will tend towards certain behaviours and women will tend towards others..and I don't think there should be any demonisation of that either. There shouldn't be anything wrong with a man crying or wearing a dress, but at the same time we shouldn't get to the point where a man showing more traditionally male characteristics should be demonised for that either. If a man doesn't feel the need to share his feelings, or remains stoic and quiet.. these are all acceptable behaviours too. I feel we are starting to dictate that men should now be in touch with their feelings, and share and show empathy, and if they don't then they are clearly backwards or some sort of caveman. But that isn't the case either, in the same way there is nothing wrong with crying or sharing your emotions. 

Toxic masculinity is often used as a term to define certain male behaviours as damaging, and yes for some people it is damaging. Yet there are many aspects of masculinity that are actually quite helpful and not damaging. The idea that I must remain strong and brave and not cry and not share my feelings.. well as a man I am absolutely fine with this. In fact I feel little value in discussing my emotions over and over to people, it simply doesn't help any more than thinking it over in my own mind. And I don't really cry.. because I don't feel the need very often. 

Part of that is surely cultural, but part of that is possibly just how my brain works. I feel a bit like there is a certain pressure now to have more feminine qualities, to be more in touch with my feelings, and that to not do that is seem as something incredibly negative. As a man I also have a support system that are my buddies. We might not open up to each other in the same way that women might do , but its still comradery, and serves a function even if it doesn't work in the same way a bunch of women might discuss their problems with each other. There is nothing toxic about any of it.
 

[Larry of the Lawn]

3 minutes ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Great post. I do think it will never be possible to be truly gender neutral, well possibly until technology or genetic meddling means that we don't really have genders.

 

Some of the feminism threads, or any of them really, might be instructive on this.  I'm by no means an expert and I am probably mangling the distinction but it sounds like your talking about sex more than gender.  

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

11 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

Some of the feminism threads, or any of them really, might be instructive on this.  I'm by no means an expert and I am probably mangling the distinction but it sounds like your talking about sex more than gender.  

I'm really just referring to broad grammatical term of gender ( which can also refer to biological sex) without really wanting to get into any discussion about the differences between the terms sex and gender, which can safely be left in those feminist threads.

[DunderMifflin]

1 hour ago, Datepalm said:

Oh no you didn't. She-Ra was freaking awesome. And - at least here - waaaay more popular than He-Man. I don't we even had He-Man.

I just mean in general. I'm sure there are some Ken fan clubs out there but he's never gonna be Barbie level.

[butterbumps!]

5 hours ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

I'm all for feminism, but there are some things that I don't think the trend towards gender neutral will ever change. I don't think, in the end, that we'll ever have a true gender neutral world. Cultural norms won't change that much, and as one poster said, he and his wife fell into a traditional marriage against their best efforts. From a biological standpoint, hormones won't allow it, especially testosterone.

I'm always a little confused by the term "gender neutral" anyway. I understand what it means, I'm just not sure how it should be applied. I am a woman. I can't say I've ever identified as a male in any way, shape or form...although when we were growing up if none of the girls were around we played with Tonka trucks and played Army with the boys. Does that count?

I don't think contemporary feminism strives for gender neutrality.  Rather, it advocates for gender equality, and often does so by tackling the stigma of "femininity" as something negative and unimportant.  Which also strives to de-stigmatize what's understood as "feminine" traits (or roles) in men, too.   That's generally the approach to this "toxic masculinity" idea-- that traditional gender designations, and especially the glorification of certain "masculine" traits (stoicism, sexual aggression, violence) and stigmatization of "feminine" traits (emotion, superficial, trivial) harm men (as well as women) in significant ways. 

[Week]

12 minutes ago, butterbumps! said:

I don't think contemporary feminism strives for gender neutrality.  Rather, it advocates for gender equality, and often does so by tackling the stigma of "femininity" as something negative and unimportant.  Which also strives to de-stigmatize what's understood as "feminine" traits (or roles) in men, too.   That's generally the approach to this "toxic masculinity" idea-- that traditional gender designations, and especially the glorification of certain "masculine" traits (stoicism, sexual aggression, violence) and stigmatization of "feminine" traits (emotion, superficial, trivial) harm men in significant ways. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/04/upshot/why-men-dont-want-the-jobs-done-mostly-by-women.html

This would be a topical example of where masculinity would be considered 'toxic' and damaging to oneself and society. An orthodoxy around masculinity can be immensely damaging to oneself and society.  

Quote

Much of men’s resistance to pink-collar jobs is tied up in the culture of masculinity, say people who study the issue. Women are assumed to be empathetic and caring; men are supposed to be strong, tough and able to support a family.

“Traditional masculinity is standing in the way of working-class men’s employment, and I think it’s a problem,” said Andrew Cherlin, a sociologist and public policy professor at Johns Hopkins and author of “Labor’s Love Lost: The Rise and Fall of the Working-Class Family in America.”

“We have a cultural lag where our views of masculinity have not caught up to the change in the job market,” he said.

And what else did this lead to .... 

Quote

It’s no surprise, then, that Donald J. Trump appealed to men who feel this way — not just his promises to bring back factory jobs, but also his machismo.

Lovely.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

5 minutes ago, Week said:

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/04/upshot/why-men-dont-want-the-jobs-done-mostly-by-women.html

This would be a topical example of where masculinity would be considered 'toxic' and damaging to oneself and society. An orthodoxy around masculinity can be immensely damaging to oneself and society.  

And what else did this lead to .... 

Lovely.

I work at a job that around the time I entered into it was typically considered to be a "female" job. I'm a Medical Assistant for a major HMO. Since I started here (about 13 years ago) I'd say that perception has changed fairly dramatically. I was one of two male MA's in the department that I work in, and now there are like 10 of us. Roughly a quarter of the MA's who work this department. I'm not sure how this plays out on a wide scale, but at the facility I work in I've seen a marked change over the past decade. 

[Rippounet]

5 hours ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

I think what some people mean by "toxic masculinity" is men who are upset about the power structure and roles being upended--women in particular are filling roles like breadwinner, and they think that means THEIR rights must necessarily be stripped in order to give women equality at home or in the workplace. There's nothing as frightening to them as a woman who is not only independent of them, but doesn't need them for security--and that falls squarely within Buss' hypothesis. Men brought home the bacon and acted as protector, not only for the woman but for her children--for hundreds of thousands of years because women were too vulnerable (pregnancy, very young children) to bring home their own. It doesn't work that way any more, and you can't change evolution and social conditioning that quickly. In other words, women have changed. Some men haven't.

Funnily enough, what I view as "toxic masculinity" is the very opposite, from a male perspective.
Just because I'm the man I don't want to necessarily be the breadwinner. I don't want my spouse to depend on me ; on the contrary, I'd rather be certain she was with me for who I am and the mutual benefits we provide each other.
What I see as "toxic" (again, from a male perspective) is the peer pressure to earn more than my partner, to be dismissive of or indifferent to her career, and to be at least as ambitious as she is (if not more).
I want to be free to have different kinds of ambitions. For instance, I resent the fact that society has drummed into me the idea that I would be a lesser man if I stayed home to raise our kids. And I'd like to be free to take a year off from work to develop an artistic-oriented project.

2 hours ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

The idea that I must remain strong and brave and not cry and not share my feelings.. well as a man I am absolutely fine with this. In fact I feel little value in discussing my emotions over and over to people, it simply doesn't help any more than thinking it over in my own mind.

I'm not fine with this at all. I don't mind keeping my feelings to myself if I have to (I've had a lifelong experience of that), but I would despise the idea of having to remain strong and brave in all circumstances, and not being able to discuss my emotions, at least with my spouse or my closefriends.

I'm not trying to be contrarian. I want to show that choice is what matters. Yes, I want my son to be strong and confident. But I also want him to be able to cry when he needs to. There are times in my life when it would have helped me to be able to.

[karaddin]

2 hours ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

The idea that I must remain strong and brave and not cry and not share my feelings.. well as a man I am absolutely fine with this. In fact I feel little value in discussing my emotions over and over to people, it simply doesn't help any more than thinking it over in my own mind. And I don't really cry.. because I don't feel the need very often. 

Part of that is surely cultural, but part of that is possibly just how my brain works. I feel a bit like there is a certain pressure now to have more feminine qualities, to be more in touch with my feelings, and that to not do that is seem as something incredibly negative.

Don't you see how this can be true for you, and you can live this way, without it needing to be a societal expectation that ALL men are this way, even those for whom its extremely harmful? That's the issue - the expectation and pressure to be a certain way that is so pervasive and deep seated that people can't even recognise its their problem and that its harming them. I really don't see how awareness of your own feelings can ever be framed as a 'feminine' or 'negative' thing though, even as I accept that it currently is. Understanding what you're feeling and knowing how to deal with that so you don't act them out on others should be a core component of being a functional and responsible adult. If you don't want to dwell in them, that's fine, but you should be capable of identifying and understanding them.

 

Regarding the whole gender neutral thing - Irrespective of whether we can ever get there or not, we currently are a long way from it and it would take a long time to get there. In the here and now we are stuck with a society that has rigid expectations of masculinity that aren't working for a lot of men, but men are punished explicitly for not conforming to them and implicitly by conforming to them. The collapse of "men as breadwinner" is taking a huge toll on an awful lot of men that feel this destroys their worth as men, it leads to depression and suicide, it leads to domestic violence. In the here and now we need to change that view of masculinity so its not actively harmful right now before it could be thrown out for a better long term goal.

 

On Breaking Bad - I actually think its the best character study in toxic masculinity I've seen in media this century and it shares something with Fight Club in that there are many people who watch both and completely miss the criticism and instead see them as glorifying the toxicity. Walt absolutely starts the series feeling emasculated in all the ways Iskaral laid out, but the point is that he shouldn't be. There is also criticism of the capitalist society (from my read of the story) that both fails to reward how he is and that leaves him in such dire straits when he is diagnosed, but the heart of it all is that he is being a good father to his son, a good husband to his wife, an exceptional teacher to his students at school and so on. He should feel a success, but instead he's being consumed by resentment directed primarily at Hank and more subconsciously at Skylar. He buries all of this after the diagnosis into the criminal enterprise and while he achieves the material success he yearned for, and the masculine empowerment he felt he lacked, he revealed a garbage can of a person lurking underneath who destroyed the lives of everyone around him while claiming to do it for his wife and children. The emotional climax of the show, and Walt's moment of 'redemption' (in as much as he could be redeemed) is not the confrontation with the white supremacists, but his admission to Skylar "I did it for me". After that he trots off to his denouement, saving Jesse and finally dying.

He's not the lens into masculinity either, Hank's journey is in the other direction - starting off as the alpha jock lawman, but starting to lose his shit after he actually has to kill someone.

[Xray the Enforcer]

1 hour ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

I work at a job that around the time I entered into it was typically considered to be a "female" job. I'm a Medical Assistant for a major HMO. Since I started here (about 13 years ago) I'd say that perception has changed fairly dramatically. I was one of two male MA's in the department that I work in, and now there are like 10 of us. 

You live in the Bay Area of California. Never forget that when we're talking about idiotic and regressive ideas about gender roles in the US. (not saying its bad...just be mindful that the social pressures there are not the same.)

[peterbound]

8 hours ago, lessthanluke said:

Why do you feel the need to strive for masculinity if you don't mind me asking Peter? 

I'm not sure that /I/ am.  I'm pretty happy with my current view of what masculinity means to me, and how I'm teaching it to my son.  What I don't want is for him to be an anachronism when he gets to be my age because his old man couldn't adapt to the changing world. 

 

Now I know that this board skews heavy, heavy towards the progressive left (I'm considered a progressive in my circles, if that tells you anything about the men in my life) so I thought i'd hear out this side of the spectrum.  I've been pleasantly surprised with the conversion.  I do feel that many want to sit on the fence about the subject, and have it both ways.  I don't think that's possible.  I do think it's possible for our individual traits to complement each other, but like one poster said above, it's not possible for us to give them up completely.  Our endocrine system won't let that happen. 

[peterbound]

8 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Oh yeah, absolutely. I'm not suggesting that woman can't embody these qualities. As a matter of fact there are a number of women in the league that I play in that are among the best players in the league. One played Division One College Basketball at a perennial power university. She's an absolute killer on the court. 

I only bring up this sort of thing because the OP seems to bemoaning (to some small degree) the sorts of instances where these traits he's describing are accepted or even prized.

When the fuck was I 'bemoaning'?  

 

And i'm far past the point here to be called the 'OP'.  Use my fucking name, man.  

[peterbound]

12 hours ago, butterbumps! said:

What led you to choose this book?   I'm curious what your thoughts about it were going in and then after reading it?

I picked it up after reading the author's thoughts on TRT (something I'm a fan of).  Can't say i was super impressed with it. 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

18 minutes ago, peterbound said:

When the fuck was I 'bemoaning'?  

 

And i'm far past the point here to be called the 'OP'.  Use my fucking name, man.  

Fair enough, peterbound. Maybe bemoaning was too strong. Troubled by the current perception perhaps?

[peterbound]

6 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Fair enough, peterbound. Maybe bemoaning was too strong. Troubled by the current perception perhaps?

Ha, look at you, a wordsmith.  

 

I like it.  

 

And i'm not sure i'm troubled... just really, really interested it in.  I belong to a culture that still celebrates the ideas of it (and I don't see that going away), and I still think there are large swaths of the country that still see it as something that needs to be part of their lives.  I just want to make sure that I'm staying ahead of upcoming changes.  Folks on here are so progressive they might as well be futurists, so I figure anything getting posted on here gives me about a 10-20 time frame to prep for it. 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

1 hour ago, Xray the Enforcer said:

You live in the Bay Area of California. Never forget that when we're talking about idiotic and regressive ideas about gender roles in the US. (not saying its bad...just be mindful that the social pressures there are not the same.)

Sure, that factors in to some degree. I'd say the more important factor was the economics surrounding this job. Back in the early 2000's, NUHW negotiated a favorable contract with most of the large HMOs, which essentially put the pay on par (or perhaps even a bit better) than say construction. That along with both better than average Health Care coverage and the recession proof nature of the job itself made it fairly desirable.

[litechick]

I agree that words fail at defining masculine and feminine.  It's more of a 'show me don't tell me' situation.

As far as imagery, I would cite pairs figure skaters.  Both are strong, both are graceful but there is a difference.  What is the difference?  Just watch.

 

[peterbound]

6 minutes ago, litechick said:

I agree that words fail at defining masculine and feminine.  It's more of a 'show me don't tell me' situation.

As far as imagery, I would cite pairs figure skaters.  Both are strong, both are graceful but there is a difference.  What is the difference?  Just watch.

 

That's a beautifully poetic way of putting that.  Can I use that?

[litechick]

Of course.

[karaddin]

Then go watch Yuri on Ice because its marvellous