Toxic Masculinity

Discuss whatever you want here ... movies, books, recipes, politics, beer, wine, TV ... everything except classical music.

Moderators: Lance, Corlyss_D

Post Reply
Belle
Posts: 1588
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:45 am

Toxic Masculinity

Post by Belle » Fri Jan 18, 2019 7:28 pm

The recent foolish Gillette advertisement has prompted many comments about 'toxic masculinity' and I think the one I've posted below is a very good one. Naturally, as the mother of 3 men and with a wonderful husband, I find the whole concept of 'toxic masculinity' deeply troubling, offensive and dangerous: this new ideology is the primary reason why my son is being treated as a criminal in the Family Law system, without ANY due process, evidence or compensatory action. He doesn't have a leg to stand on and his wife has simply ticked 3 boxes on a form, the police have come calling (at his work!!!) and after $20,000 already spent on lawyers (our money!) he is getting nowhere FAST and cannot see his sons (whom he hopes to protect against the system in the future). He has said to his recently-married brother, "You have two choices; stay married and stay married" (my son's estranged wife had an affair!). And he's the second of my sons to have to endure this. The first one had a partial win and can see his children: cost $100,000. The women are getting 'legal aid' from the taxpayer! My sons' first cousin - a high-flying Mergers & Acquisitions lawyer has been in front of the Family Court for over 5 years, was never married to the woman (she hasn't worked a day in her life) and is subject to unbelievable controls from her regarding his access to the children. Cost beyond $350,000 and counting. He recently said to his father (my husband's brother) "I'm thinking of throwing it all in and going on welfare because I can't take it anymore".

I couldn't begin to describe the level of despair in all these cases and others I won't even mention.

From misbehaving boys to violent men: the poisoning of male identity
FRANK FUREDI



Gillette’s television advertisement challenges men to shake off their ‘toxic masculinity’.
The American Psychology Association knows how to gain global attention. It is a hugely influential institution whose views have a major impact on how problems of mental health and behaviour are regarded by medical practitioners, educators and policymakers. Which is why guidelines issued last week by the APA for mental health professionals working with men and boys is likely to boost the crusade against masculine identity.

The APA’s guidelines don’t mince words. They warn that masculinity is not only a marker for illness but also a threat to society. Its verdict is that “traditional masculinity is psychologically harmful”. The APA defines traditional masculinity as “marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression”. In this negative framing of masculinity, the ancient virtues of stoicism, courage and risk-taking are casually coupled with “dominance and aggression”.

The APA’s guidelines are principally targeted at boys and young men. They warn that the bad habits associated with masculinity, such as “suppressing emotions and masking distress, often start early in life”. The APA contends that traditional masculinity is “psychologically harmful and that socialising boys to suppress their emo­tions causes damage that echoes both inwardly and outwardly”.

The medicalisation of masculine behaviour by the APA is designed to devalue boyishness and alter the meaning of what it means to be a boy.

That the guidelines are a political statement masquerading as a scientifically informed document is highlighted by its stated ambition of changing the world through changing men. One of the authors of the guidelines, Ryon McDermott, declares that if “we can change men” then “we can change the world”. From this standpoint, masculinity serves as the moral equivalent of a disease that must be eradicated.

The APA’s opinion reflects the wider cultural project of marginalising masculinity and altering the identity of boys and men. Our era, which constantly celebrates people’s identities, finds it difficult to endow the identity of the male with positive qualities.

On the contrary, masculinity has turned into what sociologist Erving Goffman, in his classic study Stigma, has characterised as a “spoiled identity”. As a result of a constant barrage of criticism, masculinity has become delegitimated and often is portrayed as a marker for pathological behaviour.

A significant section of the psychological community has become critical of masculinity because of its dislike for men’s supposed aspiration for control and autonomy.

Since the 1990s, exposing the emotional illiteracy of men has become a growth industry. There are thousands of publications that decry the failure of men to acknowledge their vulnerability and refusal to seek help. Back in the 90s, critics of masculinity applied the terms high masculinity and hegemonic masculinity to those who refused to embrace the advice of psychologists. Today, the term toxic masculinity is deployed to disparage stoic men drawn towards autonomous behaviour and self-control.

Criticism of the “male desire for control” represents an attitude towards emotional life in general. That’s why, ultimately, the APA’s hostility to masculine values is not simply about men. Women who display “masculine” characteristics such as self-control, rationality and strong ambition also have come under intense suspicion.

In contrast, men who act like women are clearly preferred to women who act like men. According to the emotionally correct hierarchy of virtuous behaviour, feminine women come out on top. Feminine men beat masculine women for second place. And, of course, masculine men come last.

The weaponisation of the term toxic masculinity is one of the most significant accomplishments of the culture war that has raged in the US in recent years.

Even advertisers have embraced the crusade against so-called toxic masculinity. Gillette’s widely publicised television ad communicates the APA’s message in a dramatic form. The ad directs the viewer’s anger at scenes of men behaving appallingly towards women. As these scenes unfold, the chant “boys will be boys” can be heard in the background. The voiceover reinforces the message of male pathology by declaring “Bullying, the Me Too movement against sexual harassment, toxic masculinity — is this the best a man can get?”

Gillette’s cautionary tale about men is widely echoed in US institutions of education. Many universities have launched anti-toxic masculine initiatives designed to resocialise male under­graduates. The term has become an all-purpose weapon wielded against male targets. Donald Trump frequently is presented as the personification of toxic masculinity.

However, since the term implicitly equates masculinity with toxicity, virtually any assertive and self-confident boy or young man can become a recipient of this label.

The term toxic masculinity, like any other cultural stereotype, has no scientific value. But that has not stopped the Australian Psychological Society from stating that although the term is sociocultural and not medical, it is useful for exploring “poisonous” behaviours. Actually, as the APS’s use of the word poisonous indicates, it is not merely a sociocultural but a moral term of abuse. It is unlikely the APS would ever dream of linking the term toxic to femininity.

The term toxic masculinity is often used to draw attention to different forms of destructive and damaging behaviour such as sexual aggression, violence, homophobia and violent behaviour. No doubt these are malign and dangerous types of behaviour.

However, the representation of such negative traits as the normal feature of masculinity is motivated by the imperative of propaganda rather than a dispassionate view of human relations. Unfortunately, many policymakers have embraced this prejudice and are promoting campaigns against the moral authority of masculinity.

The Australian government’s recent campaign against domestic violence offers a textbook example of the casual manner with which a conceptual leap from violence to boyishness is made. Like the Gillette ad, the target of this campaign is to explicitly focus on the “boys being boys” attitude in society.

As someone who still remembers his mother’s reactions to her son’s mistakes and achievements with statements such as “Boys will be boys”, I find a campaign directed against her attitude deeply disturbing. From my mother’s standpoint, “being a boy” meant being a little bit rough, assertive, single-minded and ambitious.

The government crusade against this attitude signals the conviction that boys who misbehave in school grow up to be abusers of women.

A widely distributed video titled Stop It at the Start depicts a father sitting in his car by the school gate, incredulous that his son received a detention for “flicking up a girl’s skirt”. In the back seat, the offender’s young brother pipes up and asks why the teacher does not understand that it’s “just boys being boys”. Sitting next to him is his little sister, who casually remarks, “Yeah, I mean, I’ve already accepted that as I grow up I’ll probably be harassed and even abused.”

The sight of a young girl fatalistically acknowledging that her life will be plagued by little male monsters such as those sitting in the car is likely to instil any responsible individual with a sense of unease if not horror.

Fortunately, this fantasy display of anti-boy animus bears little rela­tionship to reality. The project of targeting children “at the start” will do nothing to curb anti-social adult behaviour. Its main outcome is to confuse children, especially boys, and reinforce the confusion surrounding the meaning of male identity.

The most damaging consequence of the crusade against masculinity is its corrosive influence on the psychological and moral development of boys. From a very early age, they are told that they must curb their boyish attitudes and behaviour. They continually are bombarded by the message that they are not as emotionally intelligent, sensitive or as flexible as their girl counterparts. When they learn that masculine behaviour is considered by some of their teachers and other adults as something of a cultural crime, they naturally become disoriented and uncertain about their identity.

Not surprisingly, a lot of young men find the transition to adulthood particularly difficult because values that are associated with being a man receive little cultural validation. In the absence of any clear cultural guidance of what it means to be a boy or a man, many are confronted with an identity crisis inflicted on them by the campaign against masculinity.

The corrosive effect of the war against masculinity is not simply confined to the world of boys and young men. Society as a whole suffers from the loss of validation for the values that are wrongly attributed to men.

The virtue of courage, the value of autonomy and risk-taking have played a significant and positive role in the moral development of humankind. Even, the much-derided ethos of stoicism has helped humanity deal with the threats and challenges it faced in difficult circumstances.

Whatever its intent, the campaign against masculinity is much more than a crusade designed to change men. Our version of what it means to be a human will truly diminish if society becomes inhospitable to so-called male values such as courage, self-control and risk-taking.

Frank Furedi is emeritus professor of sociology at the University of Kent and the author of How Fear Works: The Culture of Fear in the 21st Century, published by Bloomsbury Press.

John F
Posts: 20209
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:41 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by John F » Sat Jan 19, 2019 2:42 am

What a strange way to sell safety razor blades. :roll: It's an important topic, for sure, but a 30-second TV ad for a commercial product is hardly an appropriate medium for addressing it.
John Francis

Belle
Posts: 1588
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:45 am

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by Belle » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:30 am

This topic is widely discussed in journals, newspapers, on television etc. and it's the subject of controversy now, particularly since half the population is being lectured to by corporations which use culture wars to sell their products. And professional psychological organizations in your country and Australia are now including 'toxic masculinity' as a form of deviant behaviour, as discussed in the essay. If you'll pardon the pun, it's the thin end of the wedge!!

The only really 'toxic' males we have in our culture are the imported variety, who don't value women, and those who play in a particular code of Australian contact sport. I might add that the latter group are the objects of admiration by many men and are also enthusiastically pursued by plenty of women!!

The terrifying aspect of this is who decides what is toxic and who decides what is acceptable speech and behaviour and what isn't? We are in unchartered waters now in the western world and I'm personally disturbed but it, as are friends and family. People have decided they don't want the christian churches telling them anymore about morality - well, we sure as hell don't want bureaucrats, politicians, activists and advertizing gurus doing it either.

david johnson
Posts: 1477
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 5:04 am
Location: ark/mo

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by david johnson » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:41 am

Surely, Gillette will soon air the toxic femininity ads.

Belle
Posts: 1588
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:45 am

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by Belle » Sat Jan 19, 2019 7:12 am

david johnson wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:41 am
Surely, Gillette will soon air the toxic femininity ads.
Honestly? I don't want any kind of ads directed at a particular 'toxic' gender but I'd sure like people to respect sex differences. It's not the job of advertizers!! Like being given lectures on morality by movie stars!! Remember those ads years ago where sex was used to sell products and Madison Avenue et al would take the filthy lucre of big tobacco? Imagine these same people now attempting to sermonize? Give me a break!!

jserraglio
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 7:06 am
Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by jserraglio » Sun Jan 20, 2019 7:07 am

Belle wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 7:12 am
I'd sure like people to respect sex differences....Give me a break!!
http://digg.com/video/bicycle-land-speed-record

Belle
Posts: 1588
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:45 am

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by Belle » Sun Jan 20, 2019 7:39 am

I don't get the point you're making; both sexes are capable of breaking records. In Australia at the moment we have the Australian Open grand slam tennis: the men play 5 gruelling sets (sometimes beyond 5 hours) and the women play 3 (90 mins to 2 hours) for the same prize money!! Sex differences are built into the required number of sets but equality of outcome means the same prize money is paid, no matter how little time the women spend on the court. Tonight Roger Federer lost in a rugged match that went 4.5 hours. That's why I find it absolutely thrilling; the womens' tennis not so much.

John F
Posts: 20209
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:41 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by John F » Sun Jan 20, 2019 8:35 am

It happened that I was in London in 1969, at a hotel with a TV set in the lounge, and watched the longest and most demanding tennis match I've ever seen: Pancho Gonzales v. Charlie Pasarell at Wimbledon in the first round. After losing the first two sets Gonzales, who was 41 (Pasarell was 26), eventually won it in five hours plus, 22–24, 1–6, 16–14, 6–3, 11–9 - no tie-breakers in those days. Far from exhausting him, he won the next two rounds in straight sets, needing only 6 games in each set. In the finals Arthur Ashe beat him 7-5, 4-6, 6-3, 6-3.
John Francis

jserraglio
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 7:06 am
Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by jserraglio » Sun Jan 20, 2019 10:22 am

Belle wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 7:39 am
Sex differences are built into the required number of sets but equality of outcome means the same prize money is paid, no matter how little time the women spend on the court.
In Sept 2018, Denise Mueller-Korenek smashed the motor-paced bicycle land speed record previously held by a man and did it by more than 15 mph: 167 vs. 184 mph.

Sex differences were not respected. I.e., there was no handicapping whatsoever for Mueller-Korenek.

Shea Holbrook, the race-car driver in whose slipstream the cyclist rode, literally held Ms. Mueller-Korenek's life in her hands.
Last edited by jserraglio on Sun Jan 20, 2019 11:41 am, edited 2 times in total.

Modernistfan
Posts: 1764
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:23 pm

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by Modernistfan » Sun Jan 20, 2019 10:44 am

I disagree strongly with Mr. Furedi. The reality is that the phrase "boys will be boys" used to be used to excuse minor roughhousing and other similar transgressions. (When I was about 12, I was playing baseball with one of my friends and smashed a line drive that went straight into a living room picture window of a house across the street-CRASH! We did admit to my friend's mother what happened, and arrangements were made to replace the window. Well, that is what "boys will be boys" used to mean. (As you know, I wound up with a Ph.D. in biochemistry and molecular biology from Harvard and a law degree; my accomplice in the baseball caper eventually became a full professor of philosophy at UCLA.)
Unfortunately, now that phrase is used, particularly for athletes and upper-class white boys, to excuse bullying, underage alcohol use, drug use, serious driving infractions such as reckless driving, fraternity hazing, and sexual harassment and assault. (Remember the Kavanaugh hearings.) The reality is that the acceptable options for masculinity have greatly narrowed during the last half-century; serious learning or interest in the arts, at least in the United States, is not deemed acceptable. Athletics and misogynistic pop music such as hip-hop are virtually the only acceptable outlets for boys today. The reality is that a toxic fog of fear that anything else beyond those outlets is effete, effeminate, or actually homosexual has suffused the American political and social landscape. Few if any male politicians would ever admit that in public that they enjoy classical music, opera, or serious theater; even Obama said that he deferred to his wife in such areas. (Strangely, one exception is the Trump mouthpiece Rudy Giuliani.) I remember seeing "Mao's Last Dancer" some years ago; it would be unthinkable for Republican politicians today to support a ballet company the way Bush Senior did at that time.
This has serious consequences as boys from cultures and traditions such as the Asian-American community or (until recently) much of the Jewish community where the emphasis was placed on learning and the serious arts have been placed at a serious disadvantage.
The criticism of "toxic masculinity" is not merely political correctness.

jserraglio
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 7:06 am
Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by jserraglio » Sun Jan 20, 2019 11:05 am

Modernistfan wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 10:44 am
I disagree strongly with Mr. Furedi. The reality is that the phrase "boys will be boys" used to be used to excuse minor roughhousing and other similar transgressions . . . . The criticism of "toxic masculinity" is not merely political correctness.
I agree.

Boys'll be boys, eh? Then get a load of this Girls Gone Wild video:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?ebc=ANyPxKo ... IG5ZB0fw1k



Surely such tender tots from a Kentucky Catholic boys school could never morph into a toxic MAGA-capped mob harassing a small group of Native American drummers, one of which would turn out to be a Vietnam war vet? Otherwise this might be called toxic masculinity in action.

Furedi's "crusade against masculinity" or "war against masculinity" concoction makes even less sense than the "war on Christmas" Bill O'Reilly used to cook up annually.

Image
Indianapolis Star Jan. 18, 2018: Zionsville Community High School officials are investigating after a picture posted on social media appeared to show
students using a Nazi salute. Caption on Instagram photo reportedly read: "Rumblin bumblers isn’t just a indoor soccer team, we are a cultural phenomenon."

diegobueno
Winds Specialist
Posts: 2428
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 2:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by diegobueno » Sun Jan 20, 2019 2:19 pm

Toxic masculinity is very real and very much with us, and it's big problem that needs to be addressed. Whether or not it's the business of a razor blade advertisement to address it is besides the point.

You can't fault the ad for saying that men should be better than to allow bullying and sexual harassment. Are critics of the ad really saying that bullying and sexual harassment are so intrinsic to their masculinity that to criticize it is to criticize manhood itself?

John F
Posts: 20209
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:41 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by John F » Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:18 pm

Of course not. But for a for-profit business to assume the role of moral counselor is out of order, even if this time we may think it's right. What if the next time we think it's wrong?
Last edited by John F on Sun Jan 20, 2019 4:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
John Francis

Belle
Posts: 1588
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:45 am

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by Belle » Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:43 pm

Modernistfan wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 10:44 am
I disagree strongly with Mr. Furedi. The reality is that the phrase "boys will be boys" used to be used to excuse minor roughhousing and other similar transgressions. (When I was about 12, I was playing baseball with one of my friends and smashed a line drive that went straight into a living room picture window of a house across the street-CRASH! We did admit to my friend's mother what happened, and arrangements were made to replace the window. Well, that is what "boys will be boys" used to mean. (As you know, I wound up with a Ph.D. in biochemistry and molecular biology from Harvard and a law degree; my accomplice in the baseball caper eventually became a full professor of philosophy at UCLA.)
Unfortunately, now that phrase is used, particularly for athletes and upper-class white boys, to excuse bullying, underage alcohol use, drug use, serious driving infractions such as reckless driving, fraternity hazing, and sexual harassment and assault. (Remember the Kavanaugh hearings.) The reality is that the acceptable options for masculinity have greatly narrowed during the last half-century; serious learning or interest in the arts, at least in the United States, is not deemed acceptable. Athletics and misogynistic pop music such as hip-hop are virtually the only acceptable outlets for boys today. The reality is that a toxic fog of fear that anything else beyond those outlets is effete, effeminate, or actually homosexual has suffused the American political and social landscape. Few if any male politicians would ever admit that in public that they enjoy classical music, opera, or serious theater; even Obama said that he deferred to his wife in such areas. (Strangely, one exception is the Trump mouthpiece Rudy Giuliani.) I remember seeing "Mao's Last Dancer" some years ago; it would be unthinkable for Republican politicians today to support a ballet company the way Bush Senior did at that time.
This has serious consequences as boys from cultures and traditions such as the Asian-American community or (until recently) much of the Jewish community where the emphasis was placed on learning and the serious arts have been placed at a serious disadvantage.
The criticism of "toxic masculinity" is not merely political correctness.
'Boys will be boys', ironically, has come from women!! It is women who have enabled any bad behaviours in men, historically. Men behave badly with regard to sex and they have since they emerged from the caves. Women claimed equal opportunity to do the same after the Pill came along so they're hardly in a position to hector and finger-point.

Professor Furedi is absolutely correct; men are being demonized the western world over (ergo my comments on the family law courts here in Australia) for political purposes; some women want them to shove over and get them out of the way. But when the next war comes along suddenly men will become fashionable again.

It is rank stupidity to divide society in this way; there are many millions of wonderful men and women. In contact sports male aggression is celebrated - by women!! I wouldn't be interested in these types but huge numbers of women are. And if you're going to discuss vile hip-hop don't forget to mention the politicization and of minority groups which has enabled this to thrive.

It's all hugely political; all of it, along with the 26 new genders that have suddenly appeared on the horizon. And 'toxic masculinity' is used to demonize your opponents, as my sons have been, without a scintilla of evidence. This is the sort of thing you'd expect to see in the soviet project or North Korea. It terrifies me and if you think that sections of the female population demanding men be more like them (god help us!!) is optimal I'd urge you to think again. And if you think womens' behaviour is a perfect antidote to that of males I'd say that's misdirected. In my experience bad behaviours from both sexes occur because of enabling - social, cultural and political.

In Australia the worst cases of domestic violence ended in the killing of children - most of it perpetrated by women. But this inconvenient truth has been carefully airbrushed.
Last edited by Belle on Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Belle
Posts: 1588
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:45 am

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by Belle » Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:47 pm

jserraglio wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 11:05 am
Modernistfan wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 10:44 am
I disagree strongly with Mr. Furedi. The reality is that the phrase "boys will be boys" used to be used to excuse minor roughhousing and other similar transgressions . . . . The criticism of "toxic masculinity" is not merely political correctness.
I agree.

Boys'll be boys, eh? Then get a load of this Girls Gone Wild video:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?ebc=ANyPxKo ... IG5ZB0fw1k



Surely such tender tots from a Kentucky Catholic boys school could never morph into a toxic MAGA-capped mob harassing a small group of Native American drummers, one of which would turn out to be a Vietnam war vet? Otherwise this might be called toxic masculinity in action.

Furedi's "crusade against masculinity" or "war against masculinity" concoction makes even less sense than the "war on Christmas" Bill O'Reilly used to cook up annually.

Image
Indianapolis Star Jan. 18, 2018: Zionsville Community High School officials are investigating after a picture posted on social media appeared to show
students using a Nazi salute. Caption on Instagram photo reportedly read: "Rumblin bumblers isn’t just a indoor soccer team, we are a cultural phenomenon."
This article about toxic masculinity isn't about American politics and if it were we could discuss Antifa. But I choose not to go down this road.

Belle
Posts: 1588
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:45 am

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by Belle » Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:56 pm

John F wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:18 pm
Of course not. But for a for-profit business to assume the role of moral counselor is out of order, even if this time we may think it's be right. What if the next time we think it's wrong?
Totally agree. Madison Avenue is NOT in a position to lecture and take the moral high ground and it should keep out of sociological/psychological issues, particularly something as sensitive as the demographic you're trying to win over to buy your product!!

Belle
Posts: 1588
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:45 am

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by Belle » Sun Jan 20, 2019 4:00 pm

John F wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 8:35 am
It happened that I was in London in 1969, at a hotel with a TV set in the lounge, and watched the longest and most demanding tennis match I've ever seen: Pancho Gonzales v. Charlie Pasarell at Wimbledon in the first round. After losing the first two sets Gonzales, who was 41 (Pasarell was 26), eventually won it in five hours plus, 22–24, 1–6, 16–14, 6–3, 11–9 - no tie-breakers in those days. Far from exhausting him, he won the next two rounds in straight sets, needing only 6 games in each set. In the finals Arthur Ashe beat him 7-5, 4-6, 6-3, 6-3.
In Melbourne it is NOT unusual for these athletes to be playing lengthy and exhausting matches in temperatures beyond 100 degrees. This week there is a forecast of extremely hot weather and, for some reason, Tennis Australia is reluctant to close the roof and put on the air conditioning. Our grand slam is known for its 'demanding' weather. I've watched Nadal et al. play in searing heat in a match going until 2.30am.

I feel extremely strongly about so-called 'toxic masculinity' for the reasons stated in the opening comments. I've never had these types in my life - men who like 'the biff' - but I know women who do find male aggression attractive. And I've known female victims of domestic violence and seen the affect of this on children when I was teaching. It was my non-toxic male colleagues and teachers like myself who tried to help these kids, with varying degrees of success. One died when he was 'king hit' at a local fair in 2012; he had been in my English class for two years when he was 13 and 14. I had warned him about the consequences of aggression and he once hit his school mates trying to defend my honour!! But there was little I could do because his mother had found herself an aggressive boyfriend and both of them resorted to violence with my (then) student. He wasn't a bad boy; just in need of a role model and guidance. Very sad. And we won't even discuss the appalling bullying by girls in schools of other girls - and boys!

By the way, the felon who killed my former student was given such a light sentence as to take the breath away. Again, another incidence of enabling - this time by the criminal so-called justice system. Nobody wants to look at the whole picture because it might reveal some inconvenient truths; instead it's much easier to demonize a certain section of society and take the high moral ground. Glib and shallow (and that isn't the name of a law firm!).

jserraglio
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 7:06 am
Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by jserraglio » Sun Jan 20, 2019 4:26 pm

Belle wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:47 pm
This article about toxic masculinity isn't about American politics and if it were we could discuss Antifa. But I choose not to go down this road.
Last time I checked, the Gillette Company, to say nothing of America, was still part of the Western World. Right-wingers, there and elsewhere, conjure up PC as a social threat, i.e., just so much jousting with windmills.

Belle
Posts: 1588
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:45 am

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by Belle » Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:50 pm

jserraglio wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 4:26 pm
Belle wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:47 pm
This article about toxic masculinity isn't about American politics and if it were we could discuss Antifa. But I choose not to go down this road.
Last time I checked, the Gillette Company, to say nothing of America, was still part of the Western World. Right-wingers, there and elsewhere, conjure up PC as a social threat, i.e., just so much jousting with windmills.
No sir; this is not a partisan discussion I've started. It's is about the western world and not any political party. If one side started it (and it did) the other is equally blameworthy for not putting a stop to it. And it isn't 'jousting with windmills' that men are being punished and victims of our court system because of wild, unsubstantiated claims everybody has swallowed - all because they're men. As I've said, this is something you'd expect in the old soviet project, China or North Korea. Reputational destruction, lack of due process, loss of civil rights, name-calling- this is the brave new world of identity politics and PC and most certainly not "jousting with windmills" for people who want to save their sanity. You might buy into the brave new world but it absolutely terrifies me - especially when I've got two sons directly in the firing line of SJWs who believe all men are guilty without the messy details such as evidence and have been able to convince the polity that this should be so. And it probably doesn't interest you that white males are the highest suicide group in our country at this time.

I believe in due process, evidence and personal responsibility. You cannot go wrong with that and its the basis of our legal system - or SHOULD BE - and has been up until now. For the moment many men find it easier to take their own lives than suffer the torture of our family court system and/or the label 'toxic masculinity'.

One of the most insidious aspects to all of this is white privilege - which, together with so-called 'toxic masculinity' - is used to rob people of their humanity and rights; to speak, be in positions of power or authority or look successful without being subjected to resentment and/or abuse. I always find it useful when the subjects of 'white privilege' and 'toxic masculinity' are raised or discussed (seldom in my orbit) to mention of all those thousands of young men in WW2 flying over the European countryside, dying in droves or on the beaches of Normandy or in the trenches of the Somme; after all, they were only exercising their 'white privilege' and enacting 'toxic masculinity', most of them.

God save us from such asinine epithets and 'little boxes' people have been put into (Pete Seeger got it right) and the them and us mentality which is eroding so much of our civil discourse. Question; 'who defines toxic masculinity and white privilege'? Answer: "those to whom you would least want to grant such power". Feel the hate.

I don't have anything further to say on this, except that I've instructed my husband to have inscribed on my headstone: "Not an enabler".

jserraglio
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 7:06 am
Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Re: Toxic Masculinity

Post by jserraglio » Mon Jan 21, 2019 7:17 am

Belle wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:50 pm
God save us from such asinine epithets and 'little boxes' people have been put into (Pete Seeger got it right) and the them and us mentality which is eroding so much of our civil discourse.
It once was observed about the West of the past century that the rats had begun to chew its sheets. Sadly, those sheets have now all been consumed and we are left to slumber in the rodent droppings.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests