Reveal Your Uncool Conservative Beliefs Here

I think the thing is that a lot of people probably need toxic masculinity explained to them because they don't know what it means, not everyone is plugged into woke twitter. I also think it's probably best to lead by gentle example w/most people, I don't believe people getting aggressively confronted or called out for stepping wrong works as well as others believe. I know getting aggressively confronted from right wing types has never made me go "hmmm...maybe they're correct." I don't dispute that emotions run high on subjects and I don't think people are necessarily wrong to feel argumentative at points. I don't know whether or not this is a conservative belief but maybe since I guess it could be argued that debating more diplomatically slows down social progress. Maybe? Idk.

I'll defer to sleepingbag's expertise on the subject

True story, I once came home from Roskilde Festival with a weird rash, and it turned out to be because my sleepingbag was toxic.

I am not a huge fan of callout culture but there are many times when it is necessary

I needed it in my early 20s tho

i don't think it worked

It's been known that he's that for a while but folks will engage nonetheless. xposts

Omar, I think that if pushed most will agree that diplomatic debate is important, it's just a lot of ppl are sick of being the ones that have to do it. You need ppl on your side for social progress, there are exceptions but mostly that's what it boils down to.

Ok Mordy w/e

sorry but we're gonna have to call you out a whole bunch more if we're going to get you in shape

That's never gonna happen.

I'm an unfixable mess

is it 'toxic femininity' when some psycho mommy drowns her kids in a tub?

No, it's

https://i.imgur.com/yRhkuFO.gif

is it 'toxic femininity' when some psycho mommy drowns her kids in a tub?

is it 'toxic transpersonery' when a trans person does something shitty/aggressive/criminal?

'toxic masculinity' without any other analogous terms for other genders implies that it's disproportionately men, or maybe only men, who have it within their nature to do horrible, violent things. which could be true! but doesn't it then open the door to talk about other groups of people who are disproportionately likely to commit atrocities? isn't that the kind of conversation y'all generally want to no-platform?

― sleepingbag, Saturday, March 24, 2018 6:58 PM (twelve minutes ago)

hm, so which one would you like to discuss first

educate me baby

it's true that men on average have higher rates of violence than women. it's also true that the variances between individuals in a particular gender are much wider than when compared in aggregate.

Oh is that a fact

it’s obv true the question is if it’s material

I think the bigger hurdle/thing you have to explain every time here isn't separating between toxic and non-toxic masculinity, it's keeping in mind that masculinity doesn't = men and everything they do.

― Daniel_Rf, Saturday, March 24, 2018 10:59 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Surely masculinity kind of does mean 'men and everything they do' though? As an individual man there's nothing you do and nothing you are that is somehow outside of masculinity? Like how when ppl arguing about stuff on the internet say "ok, but leaving gender/race/class aside for a moment...", and it makes no sense because there's nothing 'beyond' those things.

If I'm reading you right you're saying that a man hearing the term 'toxic masculinity' will likely understand it as an indictment of everything they are and could ever be, and reject it on that basis, so there's a need to explain that an indictment of masculinity is not necessarily an indictment of them as an individual - but it is an indictment of them as an individual! Once you subtract 'masculinity' from them as a person, there's literally nothing left

um, no. just no.

Right, so if I say this milk is toxic then I'm disparaging all milk? This is not how adjectives work.

some people use the term 'toxic masculinity' in a way that doesn't preclude the existence of non-toxic masculinity, but I thought from what Daniel said he was basically taking the same angle as sibly earlier:

The things that are bad about “toxic masculinity” are just the things that are bad about masculinity, the extra adjective essentially signifies “#notallmen”

― valorous wokelord (silby), Saturday, March 24, 2018 7:00 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

or like Mordy said 'a non-negligable number of ppl who use the idiom believe that all "masculinity" is toxic'

That's not what's wrong aboyt what you're saying.

what's your take on why I'm wrong

not everyone is plugged into woke twitter

Praise be.

xp I don't mean that to sound passive aggressive, I mean it's very likely that I am wrong! would just like to know where you're coming from

'Masculinity' is not the whole of my identity, it's a social construct. And a harmful one at that.

That's not to say that 'masculinity' is a randomly created term. Ironically, most of my feminist work, consisting of pretty militant anti-MRA articles, would probably be said to be typically male and testostorone prone - and has been called out as that by women. But I also know part of why my writing has been somewhat impactful has a lot to do with me being male, and being allowed to write angry things without being described as 'hysterical' for instance. And that's why I'm okay with 'masculinity' being described as toxic, even though I'm quite 'masculine' myself.

can't it be both a social construct and also the whole of your identity simultaneously? is there any part of your existence that isn't shaped by this social construct?

don't mind me, just passing by and fucking off again

- i'm not sure anybody is just one aspect of their identity all the time, and i think all aspects of identity are to some extent situational and performative. so it ought to be possible in theory to question those aspects of ourselves and critique them and to at least wonder whether we could do them differently. fwiw i think these are also the assumptions of people who think masculinity has positives that should be emphasized or developed.

And that's why I'm okay with 'masculinity' being described as toxic, even though I'm quite 'masculine' myself.

Are you though? Or is that you’re Tuomas two? A weird bald Scandinavian looking for love and cred in all the wrong places?

Surely masculinity kind of does mean 'men and everything they do' though? As an individual man there's nothing you do and nothing you are that is somehow outside of masculinity? Like how when ppl arguing about stuff on the internet say "ok, but leaving gender/race/class aside for a moment...", and it makes no sense because there's nothing 'beyond' those things.

I think you're mixing up masculinity and maleness there? I can't escape my maleness, no matter how I behave - it's a position of privilege within the current system. But "masculinity" doesn't just refer to the position of being a cis male - it's a code of conduct, a set of expectations of what males should be like and behave like. And yeah of course I can do tons of stuff that falls outside those parameters! Much as non-males can engage in masculine behaviour.

The idea of a non-toxic masculinity, when I've encountered it, tends to be equally prescriptive - finding examples of "good men" and asking ppl to emulate them. Which I guess is fine, it's probably a step a lot of ppl need at this point. But it's also alienating to me, because it does presuppose a kind of gender essentialism, that men need other men to look to for how to behave.

http://m.quickmeme.com/img/08/083d6c2582aa4e971e99e4a959afe4a1c6b965a569d965c7288946290245ffee.jpg

what's your take on why I'm wrong

Soref, you are badly missing the plot. Sorry to have to explain it again, but toxic masculinity = "bro culture." It's fine to be a man and it's even fine to be a cis, straight man and do manly things. However, there are certain things commonly mistaken for "masculine" traits that seem to be applauded or encouraged among a subset of people that serve to distinguish a "real man." The idea that real men must be dominant, cold, and selfish 100% of the time is toxic. It's not okay to commit or condone sexual assault or rape, to engage in violence over any perceived slight, or to question or police another's manliness or sexual orientation because they did something differently to how you would have done it. It's that sense of hostility and overblown machismo that is now defined as "toxic masculinity." Remove those things and you're left with regular masculinity. And if you want that to be the whole of your identity, that's fine, but I think you'd be limiting yourself somewhat.

separate topic, I think this guy is actually a 33-year-old democratic party consultant posing as a high school student

https://ei.marketwatch.com/Multimedia/2018/03/24/Photos/ZH/MW-GG195_hogg_2_20180324134838_ZH.jpg?uuid=94f95c8e-2f8b-11e8-b712-ac162d7bc1f7

it's even fine to be a cis, straight man and do manly things.

gee thanks!

Can everyone please issue statements to sleepingbag that they aren't personally dictating what he can and can't do in order to avoid any further misunderstandings?

I’m not making any extra effort for sleepingbag

Fair enough, he would probably find something else to deliberately misunderstand anyway.

sorry guys you're right, this is the first time i've ever encountered a progressive condescendingly licensing proper ideas + behavior as if they were in a position to do so and it took me by complete surprise

deliberately

(•_•)

( •_•)>⌐■-■

(⌐■_■)

Try a little harder

███████████████████████████████─
──────▀█▄▀▄▀████▀──▀█▄▀▄▀████▀──
────────▀█▄█▄█▀──────▀█▄█▄█▀────

.
▄▄█████████████████████████████─
▀▀▀───▀█▄▀▄▀████▀──▀█▄▀▄▀████▀──
────────▀█▄█▄█▀──────▀█▄█▄█▀────

.
██████████████████████████
─██▄▀▄▀█████──██▄▀▄▀█████─
──▀██▄█▄██▀────▀██▄█▄██▀──

step 2 me I'll roll u up sleepingbag
then take u camping and forget u at the campsite and never call to see if u turned up

Lol

part of why my writing has been somewhat impactful has a lot to do with me being male, and being allowed to write angry things without being described as 'hysterical' for instance. And that's why I'm okay with 'masculinity' being described as toxic

this is interesting -- the "toxic" adjective is in a sense corrective: if women are going to take the same tack and be labeled "hysterical" (or some equivalent), it's only fair (it follows) that men should be policed similarly

toxic use of ‘impactful’

this is interesting -- the "toxic" adjective is in a sense corrective: if women are going to take the same tack and be labeled "hysterical" (or some equivalent), it's only fair (it follows) that men should be policed similarly

hmmm idk, that's a trap that a lot of leftists/progressives/whatevers fall into i think, following privilege rhetoric to the conclusion that everyone's lives should be shittier instead of raised up to the same standard of how we currently treat straight white males.

also "let's call them all terrorists" instead of "maybe they all need mental health help"

this stuff is always on my mind but i can't say i have anything constructive to add about it any more (i used to think so). i kind of let my feelings guide my actions and try not to get too involved in making pronouncements on myself or others. if someone is being pretty obviously misogynist, i try to 'close the tab' so to speak or remove myself from the situation because it just makes me angry. also if someone seems too invested in 'being masculine' (mentions it in their grindr bio for instance), that's a turn-off. caring enough about being in some kind of role to name it says you're too neurotic about it for me and not interested in real sun energy (exploring all the roles). i am kind of fascinated whenever i see people performing masculinity: how natural does it seem, where are the cracks, when does the tension of doing it erupt into a bit of self-consciousness and what do the escape valves look like (humor? humiliation?)

lately i feel like an aspect of 'masculinity' people are needing / desiring is rootedness, which absolutely shouldn't be gendered and maybe that's part of the problem. like thinking about the texas bomber, how derelict does your soil have to be in order to do something like that.

I won't defend Samantha Bee for her comment, knowing the WHAT ABOUT debate it would inevitably have kicked off.