This. Started out straight egalitarian with a focus on men’s rights as a woman. Learned more. Listened more. Quickly switched to focusing on women’s rights.
I was watching a therapist online and he said that traditional (talk) therapy doesn't always work for men. However he did say that therapy dedicated to Coaching works better because men don't want to talk they want to do. So maybe men need to find the right kind of therapy?
men have been 'doing' to work through their feelings for centuries and that obviously hasn't sufficiently worked. the definition of insanity and all. more like men are scaredy cats who can't directly face their emotions or don't have the tools to talk (we should give them the tools). do you think women aren't given practical life advice aswell in therapy or encouraged to channel their attention through a hobby? you need both.
I believe this works for every single person. Most therapies start with talking, because you have to find the root of the problem, but then you get exercizes or homework and guidelines to try to enforce the change in your behaviour that changes the behaviours of people causing you pain. There is no therapy that works on 2 different human the same.
There's EMDR and tapping and somatic exercise. Men could do all kinds of therapy besides just talk therapy. For most, it's laziness and resistance to work and entitlement that keeps them from following through.
Was this Dr K? I saw a video about how useless therapy was. Loads of comments were agreeing with him underneath. However, a few men did mention something called "Solution focused brief therapy". It was aimed at men for whom more explorative therapy didn't work. The majority of complaining men didn't think about investigating options, but we're just whining. There's also EFT, EMDR and Somatic experiencing. I made the mistake of suggesting EFT to a whiny guy on Reddit. He said he'd look into EFT. I regret doing it because such guys just want sympathy for their "predicament". Plenty of people were giving him that in the comments.
It seems to me that the author of the study IS identifying a structural issue, specifically a structure that socializes everyone to regard certain behaviors in men as undesirable. These are the same behaviors that would reduce the risk of personal unaliving. So we need to both change those societal expectations as well as helping those who have been socialized in this way to modify their internal expectations. And this has been the work of many feminists, especially many 2nd wave feminists, for a long time. I remember as a child in the 70s wearing out my (vinyl) record of the TV special “Free to Be, You and Me”. Rosie Greer, an absolute mountain of an NFL player, sang the song “It’s Alright to Cry” and it contained many other stories and songs along these lines. That and many other conscious efforts to change and counteract societal expectations were present in my life as a child, and I'm all the better for it.
YES! So, it’s still structural/systemic, but they’re also structures and systems that men have more power to change… which then gives them more responsibility.
@phastinemoon I'm not sure I'd frame it that way. Saying that depressed men who have been so failed by the social expectations they were raised in that they are at risk of suicide have "greater responsibility to change" isn't really responding to the issue. Society as a whole has a responsibility to change how we raise our children, but also a need to find ways to effectively respond to the harm that has been done to earlier generations. Men are part of society, certainly, and it's also the case that ultimately someone in crisis can only be helped if they do the work to let themselves be helped, but we all need to work to make that possible.
Exactly. Sayimg that all men are just flawed and they need to fix themselves. Insinuate that either all men are born broken in some way that women aren't. Or that male culture exists in such a bubble that women play little to no roll in the lives of men.
The issue of male suicide being brought up time and time again on social media really soured for me once I learned that women attempt self deletion significantly more often than men do. It's not a huge difference. But it is a significant one. The reason for men's rate of "successful" 😢 self deletion being higher is that men choose methods that are significantly more likely to "work". But instead of discussing these layered issues - such as WOMEN'S increased risk of self deletion, and presumably the possibility of men's intensity of the experience of those kind of thoughts and feelings and the possibility that men's propensity towards violence whether social biological or individual is affecting these outcomes, the topic itself is simply used to shame and attempt to silence women.
@@randomas8634 This is unusually positive framing tbh. It's probably more due to vanity and fear of being seen in such a messy way; it's "unbecoming" if you will.
Nah, cleanliness is literally expected of women, to come from them. They often don't want to be an inconvenience. They want to minimize the trauma incurred by the person who finds them. All of those are probably more pressing than "I wanna be pretty, at least until the rigor mortis kicks in".
Men’s experiences do deserve to be talked about (like men being rape victims) But we need to talk about the word “rights”. Systemically men aren’t in any danger any time soon of having rights stripped away. Women can’t force men to get vasectomies and women could never take men’s education away. Men will never know what it feels like to feel like they deserve to be punished just for having sex. A father high fives his son, but a daughter could face homelessness. It’s like heterosexuals marching for rights when their right to marry whoever they want won’t be threatened anytime soon. Rights isn’t the word I’d use but i absolutely agree on needing a word for highlighting men’s experiences that are normally drowned in society’s shadows.
Thank you for this. I do think that toxic masculinity can be enforced by both genders, but the change must start with men. It can't be normalized that men can be weak or cry if men keep supressing that and mocking men who do that. I also think that the action must start with parents, teaching them that boys also need to be taught emotional regulation and emotional expression. But this action is seen as bad by MRAs and men's group, saying that moms are emasculating men and calling gentle and respectful parenting "woke parenting".
Eh I think it must start with women as well. There are supposedly many women that encourage a man to cry and then lose interest if he does, or some shit like this. And then I hear stories from other women who say that they wouldn't want to date a guy who cries in front of them. Idk how big of an issue that really is, but as long as straight men fear ridicule from women, things won't change. So I think everyone has a part to play. I personally try to play into the change by being there for people who open up to me, even though I'm not extremely good at it.
@@solar0wind crying has it's place, just like every emotion. If you cry because your relative died or smth like that - nobody's going to berate you for it. But if you use tears to get what you want from women, andit's usually s*x or services - then you're just being dishonest with your intentions. Do men like when women cry all the time? They say 'she's nagging' or 'she's trying to manipulate' Don't weaponise your emotions against women and you'll be fine
@solar0wind I've heard the whole "women want men to open up but then mock or reject them when they do," a whole bunch of times, but what I haven't heard - not even ONCE, mind you - is any specifics, any details, any "this happened to me." I am suspicious. Seems like "the pay gap is a myth!" or "false accusations!" or "women always get custody and turn their kids against their fathers!" or other MRA talking points with nothing real behind them.
@@solar0windSo why aren't they opening up around their male friends? Why are men relying on women to be their safe space? You are centering women when talking about men's emotions and their behaviors. It is not women's job to be safe spaces for men's feelings. So no. It doesn't not need to start with women. Men need to learn emotional regulation with each other too.
This! It's what I've been arguing for years! Yes, we need to identify the problem, but most importantly we have to be honest about the root cause of the problem in order to fix the problem! If someone is focusing on the problem only and is not interested in learning, talking about, hearing or even acknowledging the root cause of the issue, do they really care about fixing the issue? Do they even really care about the issue itself? Doesn't seem like it. Especially if they only bring up the issue as a tool to distract and try to minimize or dismiss other people's issues.
It went from Paul Elam simply advocating for men's rights all the way to Roosh all the way to Nick Fuentes and Andrew Tate advocating for taking away women's rights.
with respect to therapy. are there any online men support groups that are free? my son has been looking for a therapist and we thought a support group might be easier to find. he and his sister were hunted by their grandma (my mom) who was a psychopath and wanted to remove them from my life, for his entire childhood so trauma recovery groups
I’m a bi woman that has picked a side (if ya know ya know). Of men were like women. Operated the same level and were similarly as safe I’d adore a little man to be a house husband. But they don’t and the risk is too high. Plus I lean way to women XD
Try it. If you are serious with therapy it can be very helpful. But it's not easy. Really looking inside you can be a very hurtful process but in the end this is the pain that will actually make you stronger.
I freaking love going to therapy. I literally look forward to it. I can't wait to tell my therapist all the things I have been working on since the last time we talked. It's been life changing and I started back in june
I decided to read some of his posts and replies for myself, and while you show what he literally said I think you’re adding on unfounded interpretations that don’t hold water under further investigation, making what he was implying sound worse than it means. For instance he criticizes the use of the term toxic masculinity, but when looking at the details of that criticism and other things he said it seems he doesn’t have an issue with talking about problems that tend to get described as examples of toxic masculinity. He shows quotes of guys saying that the hardest thing about growing up as a boy is being expected not to cry and suppress emotions in his currently last post. Looking at the criticisms he has of toxic masculinity they’re that it could negatively affect the mental health of guys who hear the term, that the term doesn’t have a coherent definition, and that it misidentifies the problem. It seems that his issue is with using the term toxic masculinity and not with discussing problems that tend to be described as examples of toxic masculinity. Looking at other replies under his posts about suicide he also criticizes mental health support for men but he doesn’t seem to imply that men shouldn’t go into therapy or that therapy for men would be bad if you actually read in detail what he says. It seems that his criticism is that there’s more research on mental health support for women than for men, and so talk therapy isn’t as adapted to help men with mental health issues as it is with women. Also he seems to be implying that talk therapy isn’t enough rather than that it’s useless. I think saying men and women have different needs is meaning that they have different needs in terms of how the therapist talks to them rather than different needs in terms of rather they need therapy.
My problem with therapy is that all you say is not confidential. There is a magic line that if you cross the therapist is required to contact the authorities. So for me, being open about my thoughts during talk therapy can lead to serious repercussions.
talk therapy was literally created by a man. freud explored the concept of dreamwork and the talking cure on himself. the psychology field was inundated with men until very recently. also, where is he getting the impression that most mental health studies are done on women? like is there statistical proof (sincerely). cuz it's a verifiable fact that the medical field, like most fields, is centered around men.
how could the idea of toxic masculinity harm men when it implies the existence of 'healthy masculinity'? quick recap, masculinity isn't tied to men. it's an arbritrary categorisation of traits shared by both genders, that boys have been socialised to embody more. the toxic kind is used to maintain artificial male supremacy, with men sacrificing their vulnerability in return. oh frick off with the 'the genders have different needs' schtick. how's that been working out, you'll say shit like this then complain no one cares about your feelings. well, if you don't want to talk about your feelings because it doesn't help, why should we listen? both genders need a healthy balance of emotional discourse, physical catharsis and problem solving to be functional, incase you try to hit me with the 'women just like talking more' bullshit.
@@bobklein7366 what would you like to say in therapy that would require them to alert the police? unless you're actively planning on doing harm to yourself or others, your info is private.
@@bobklein7366they won't get you for past issues that haven't been resolved, meaning they can and will turn into a current problem. Unless you're admitting to have murdered ppl you haven't been caught for, if they tell your business, you can sue and have their license revoked. But that's different from saying you have the urge to commit murder because you haven't done wrong, and you can still be helped down from the ledge
On a somewhat related note, I've come to the conclusion that feminism also sometimes promotes bad masculine norms and stereotypes. One could acknowledge and talk about how men are individual people, and especially about how any given man may have mental conditions (particularly autism), disabilities or be part of one or more minorities, they may be gender non-conforming or they may not be straight. But all too often, feminists instead focus on making sweeping generalisations about "men" that represent the worst stereotypes of neurotypical able-bodied cis straight white men, which isn't representative of the men above, and furthering those stereotypes are in fact detrimental to their lives. But anyone who calls that out is criticised for doing so, for taking offense at something that wasn't specifically addressed at them, even though those stereotypes have a direct effect on them and furthering those stereotypes is damaging. Those same feminists will often criticise anyone who makes comparable generalisations about women or people of colour. Just imagine someone (potentially some years ago) asking "would you rather be stuck in the woods with a bear or with a black person", lots of people answering the bear, and then criticising other people for taking issue with those answers. I was fine with the original question at first, but someone bringing up this analogy changed my perspective. I don't have as much of an issue with the answers (you feel the way you feel, whether that's reasonable or not), but I do have an issue with the question, with carving out some category of people as them being the problem, even though that includes lots of innocent people who are judged for the misfortune of having been "born wrong". We need to challenge and break down those stereotypes, not reinforce them.
And yet feminists get blamed for supporting non cis normative men. Feminists get blamed that non cis het normative people have any rights at all. The question about bear vs man in the woods is completely different to a question of bear vs black person. The original question was asked by a man wishing to generate a “controversial” response. Don’t blame women for the reality that men are a threat and danger to them. Obviously not all men, but we don’t know which ones.
I agree, when speaking to an individual person, it is important to see this person as the individual they is - with their personal thoughts, traits, needs. When we speak about society however, we don't speak of individuals. We then speak about a societal group of people. It seems very difficult to differentiate between the two. But it is important. When speaking about "men", we talk about a societal group. When I speak about YOU, I speak about specifically you and your individual thoughts and needs. When I say "men go ..." I do make absolutely no statement about whether or not "you go..." (You could compare it to a statement about "hospital stuff is highly misinformed about ASD". This is a societal statement and therefore generalized. It is a valid statement to point out a societal problem. But it says nothing about the specific hospital around the corner, which might be not open at all, which might be well informed or even specialized in ASD.) Therefore: General statements must be differentiated from personalized statements. Because: Generalized statements are a necessary tool in societal discussions.
Concerning the bear question: the comparism with a black person is very flawed. Reason: the thought that a black person is especially dangerous was always based on prejudice - no matter in what time. On the contrary, that "men" (societal generalization!) are a danger to woman is no prejudice but historical as well as contemporary fact. Here too, it does not make a statement about you and me, it only makes a general statement about men - in general. I offer a different comparism: You come back home and see a complete stranger on your couch. What would you prefer? 1. A man you know nothing about why he is here, what he is doing, what his temper or thoughts are, how strong he is, (why the heck did he break into your house? Does he want your life, does he want to hold you hostage? does he want to torture you? Did he follow you to your apartment?) 2. would you prefer a bear? (You can see the specie, you can do a good guess why he broke in, you can back out, you can be pretty sure he did not come to eat you but only wants food you have in the house, he will not follow you if you quietly back off) etc. Think about it. Which one's behaviour seems easier to calculate? Which one poses therefore the lesser threat?
@@sandra.helianthus You seem to be responding as if I was talking about hurt feelings, which I wasn't. I was talking about stereotypes and how those affect people (my comment used "stereotype" 6 times, and your reply used it 0 times). My entire point is that a lot of these generalisations we make about people are... well, generalisations. Stereotypes. They strip away the individuality of the people involved, in favour of lumping them into a category that doesn't represent them. And when people get down to the individual interactions, those stereotypes persist and serves as the starting point or foundation for how other people see and treat them (and possibly also how they see and treat themselves). This is the entire reason why stereotypes are problematic.
@@sandra.helianthus "hospital staff are highly misinformed about ASD" - I'd say even there it's better to add a "many" qualifier. But even still, it's not a good analogy because a hospital worker chose to be a hospital worker, and they stop being a hospital worker (in the functional sense) when they go home at night. You're talking about their career performance, whereas what people say about men are very integral to their character and who they are as a person. That analogy serves to strip away the emotion, the empathy and ultimately the humanity, from the discussion, but that's what the discussion is fundamentally about. A better analogy would be making comparable generalisations about women. And I could easily find you hundreds of videos of feminists taking issue with others making exactly such generalisations. There's a significant double standard here, where it's perfectly fine to say bad things about men, and anyone who disagrees is just "being too sensitive" (feminists' support of men being open with their emotions is only skin-deep, and stops the moment they dislike those emotions). But it's not considered fine if similar things are said about women. Someone might say this double standard is justified because of inequality, but making this argument would undermine the "it's not about you as an individual" argument. You can't have your cake and eat it too by saying generalisations are fine, "necessary", in fact, but then turn around and say generalisations are only fine when they're directed towards this group but not other groups.
Well as most men have never had any male role models. .. Single mom never had a male teacher , school to prison pipeline. Teachers grading and discipline boys unfairly etc etc. We taught, abused an entire generation of boys into believing they were toxic and defective.
Anybody who can't identify those behaviors (i.e violence, bottling emotions, putting down other men for being "weak") as social norms and recognize they are harmful. Men or women can enforce these norms. An example I've seen many times by both is making fun of a man for doing something that is traditionally seen as feminine, like a hobby or a habit he has.
Men are toxic , that's what they have been saying for a few decades now. Raised by single moms, no male teacher or role models. Who taught them to be toxic?
@@MichelleSmith-gt1py Men are toxic , that's what they have been saying for a few decades now. Raised by single moms, no male teacher or role models. Who taught them to be toxic?
the patriarchy is a reaction to feminism. what?! what is toxic feminism? what could ever justify men getting on microphones and advocating for our rights to be taken away again for us to be abused and dehumanised (a dangerous precedent when men have the systematic power to do so and have done so) because a couple of feminists weren't 'nice enough to men'.
I'm here to remind people that the observation of society, does not make statements on individuals, but it does make valid statements about societal problems. ("Men" = societal group of people, grouped together to speak about issues in society VS. You = specific individual who might, but does not nessecarily and totally, fit the societal issues of that group)
which again, is a talking point that exists to suck up all the oxygen in the room so the prevailing issues that are affecting both men and women deriving from toxic masculine norms that some men feel the need to measure themselves and other men against, many of those standards involving how men should think about and behave towards women. It is not about assigning blame to each and every man(it is literally a man in the video laying out these points), but to deconstruct the cultural norms that leads to dysfunction and conflict because men's self-identity as men is made dysfunctional through an over-reliance of having to prove their masculinity through destructive behavior. If you feel targeted by conversations that try to deconstruct toxic beliefs men have on a systemic level, maybe reflect on where that defensive reflex is coming from.
An embarrassing video full of blatant projection, you have just described almost exclusively feminist behaviour and in case it wasn’t obvious enough they are the ones in academia with influence over legislation. Opinions are beyond you I’m afraid given just how badly you’ve missed the mark.
There’s no such thing as ‘feminist behavior’ the fact that you are un-ironically using that phrase tells me a lot. The fact of the matter is that feminism, actually says it’s OK for men to cry it’s OK for men to feel emotions and seek help with therapy and medication and other means.
here we have an example of a so-called "free thinker" being challenged with academic studies. Surely it must be the feminists who influence legislation and decided to overturn Roe v Wade. They must be playing some 4D chess we can barely comprehend.
What if the behavior you view as "masculine" is mostly a cosplay that society pressures you to perform? What if you could just be yourself, and not have other people shut you down and shut you out? I expect a lot of men will still like fast, loud cars and football, and that would be OK. But also you wouldn't *have* to like fast, loud cars or football, And that would be OK, too. But I'm "just a woman", so what do I know. And you're welcome to join academia at any time. There have never been restrictions on men recieving an education.
good advice for men i saw from a psychiatrist: men have a hard time recognizing and describing emotions in abstract terms, much like an autistic person would. for allistic men, it's a lot more social than neurological, but it still impacts therapy! tell your therapist when 'how does that make you feel?' is a useless question, it's ok. tell them 'i can't make out more complex emotions and i think that's a big problem', cause that's true for you, and that's what matters. and most importantly: emotions don't go away because you ignored them. they jsut get really good at hiding.
This. Started out straight egalitarian with a focus on men’s rights as a woman.
Learned more. Listened more.
Quickly switched to focusing on women’s rights.
I was watching a therapist online and he said that traditional (talk) therapy doesn't always work for men. However he did say that therapy dedicated to Coaching works better because men don't want to talk they want to do. So maybe men need to find the right kind of therapy?
men have been 'doing' to work through their feelings for centuries and that obviously hasn't sufficiently worked. the definition of insanity and all. more like men are scaredy cats who can't directly face their emotions or don't have the tools to talk (we should give them the tools). do you think women aren't given practical life advice aswell in therapy or encouraged to channel their attention through a hobby? you need both.
I believe this works for every single person. Most therapies start with talking, because you have to find the root of the problem, but then you get exercizes or homework and guidelines to try to enforce the change in your behaviour that changes the behaviours of people causing you pain.
There is no therapy that works on 2 different human the same.
There's EMDR and tapping and somatic exercise. Men could do all kinds of therapy besides just talk therapy. For most, it's laziness and resistance to work and entitlement that keeps them from following through.
Was this Dr K? I saw a video about how useless therapy was. Loads of comments were agreeing with him underneath. However, a few men did mention something called "Solution focused brief therapy". It was aimed at men for whom more explorative therapy didn't work. The majority of complaining men didn't think about investigating options, but we're just whining. There's also EFT, EMDR and Somatic experiencing. I made the mistake of suggesting EFT to a whiny guy on Reddit. He said he'd look into EFT. I regret doing it because such guys just want sympathy for their "predicament". Plenty of people were giving him that in the comments.
@@AG-iu9lvPreach. Guys like to complain, but do nothing.
It seems to me that the author of the study IS identifying a structural issue, specifically a structure that socializes everyone to regard certain behaviors in men as undesirable. These are the same behaviors that would reduce the risk of personal unaliving. So we need to both change those societal expectations as well as helping those who have been socialized in this way to modify their internal expectations.
And this has been the work of many feminists, especially many 2nd wave feminists, for a long time. I remember as a child in the 70s wearing out my (vinyl) record of the TV special “Free to Be, You and Me”. Rosie Greer, an absolute mountain of an NFL player, sang the song “It’s Alright to Cry” and it contained many other stories and songs along these lines. That and many other conscious efforts to change and counteract societal expectations were present in my life as a child, and I'm all the better for it.
YES!
So, it’s still structural/systemic, but they’re also structures and systems that men have more power to change… which then gives them more responsibility.
@phastinemoon I'm not sure I'd frame it that way. Saying that depressed men who have been so failed by the social expectations they were raised in that they are at risk of suicide have "greater responsibility to change" isn't really responding to the issue. Society as a whole has a responsibility to change how we raise our children, but also a need to find ways to effectively respond to the harm that has been done to earlier generations. Men are part of society, certainly, and it's also the case that ultimately someone in crisis can only be helped if they do the work to let themselves be helped, but we all need to work to make that possible.
Exactly. Sayimg that all men are just flawed and they need to fix themselves. Insinuate that either all men are born broken in some way that women aren't.
Or that male culture exists in such a bubble that women play little to no roll in the lives of men.
This is a remarkable explanation, actually.
I've never heard this put so eloquently. Extremely impressed by this video.
The issue of male suicide being brought up time and time again on social media really soured for me once I learned that women attempt self deletion significantly more often than men do. It's not a huge difference. But it is a significant one.
The reason for men's rate of "successful" 😢 self deletion being higher is that men choose methods that are significantly more likely to "work". But instead of discussing these layered issues - such as WOMEN'S increased risk of self deletion, and presumably the possibility of men's intensity of the experience of those kind of thoughts and feelings and the possibility that men's propensity towards violence whether social biological or individual is affecting these outcomes, the topic itself is simply used to shame and attempt to silence women.
It’s assumed women aren’t serious, they are doing it for drama and attention.
"more likely to work" aka leaving a mess, and a graphic one at that, for some other sucker to find and have to clean up.
@@randomas8634 This is unusually positive framing tbh. It's probably more due to vanity and fear of being seen in such a messy way; it's "unbecoming" if you will.
@@randomas8634 Reminds me of how women are more likely to use things like poison to off people instead of, ahem, less 'subtle' methods.
Nah, cleanliness is literally expected of women, to come from them. They often don't want to be an inconvenience. They want to minimize the trauma incurred by the person who finds them. All of those are probably more pressing than "I wanna be pretty, at least until the rigor mortis kicks in".
Men’s experiences do deserve to be talked about (like men being rape victims)
But we need to talk about the word “rights”. Systemically men aren’t in any danger any time soon of having rights stripped away. Women can’t force men to get vasectomies and women could never take men’s education away.
Men will never know what it feels like to feel like they deserve to be punished just for having sex. A father high fives his son, but a daughter could face homelessness.
It’s like heterosexuals marching for rights when their right to marry whoever they want won’t be threatened anytime soon.
Rights isn’t the word I’d use but i absolutely agree on needing a word for highlighting men’s experiences that are normally drowned in society’s shadows.
Feminism, actually says it’s OK for men to cry, it’s OK for men to feel emotions and seek help with therapy, medication and other means.
Exactly. Because feminism is pro-men.
Some do, probably most honestly. And then theres a few, probably in this comment section, who think all men should suffer and anti live.
@@pajamas720 is mostly misogynistic men who think that about women
@@dorino9057 if you you want to be an incel!!
Women say they want men to express their emotions. But will never date men who do.
@@DeadCat-42 completely untrue expressing your emotions is one thing trying to gaslight or manipulate with them is another thing
man's prayer from Possum Lodge - "I'm a man, but I can change, if I have to, I guess".
Thank you for this.
I do think that toxic masculinity can be enforced by both genders, but the change must start with men. It can't be normalized that men can be weak or cry if men keep supressing that and mocking men who do that.
I also think that the action must start with parents, teaching them that boys also need to be taught emotional regulation and emotional expression. But this action is seen as bad by MRAs and men's group, saying that moms are emasculating men and calling gentle and respectful parenting "woke parenting".
Eh I think it must start with women as well. There are supposedly many women that encourage a man to cry and then lose interest if he does, or some shit like this. And then I hear stories from other women who say that they wouldn't want to date a guy who cries in front of them. Idk how big of an issue that really is, but as long as straight men fear ridicule from women, things won't change. So I think everyone has a part to play. I personally try to play into the change by being there for people who open up to me, even though I'm not extremely good at it.
@@solar0wind crying has it's place, just like every emotion. If you cry because your relative died or smth like that - nobody's going to berate you for it. But if you use tears to get what you want from women, andit's usually s*x or services - then you're just being dishonest with your intentions. Do men like when women cry all the time? They say 'she's nagging' or 'she's trying to manipulate' Don't weaponise your emotions against women and you'll be fine
@solar0wind I've heard the whole "women want men to open up but then mock or reject them when they do," a whole bunch of times, but what I haven't heard - not even ONCE, mind you - is any specifics, any details, any "this happened to me." I am suspicious. Seems like "the pay gap is a myth!" or "false accusations!" or "women always get custody and turn their kids against their fathers!" or other MRA talking points with nothing real behind them.
@@solar0windSo why aren't they opening up around their male friends? Why are men relying on women to be their safe space? You are centering women when talking about men's emotions and their behaviors. It is not women's job to be safe spaces for men's feelings. So no. It doesn't not need to start with women. Men need to learn emotional regulation with each other too.
This! It's what I've been arguing for years! Yes, we need to identify the problem, but most importantly we have to be honest about the root cause of the problem in order to fix the problem! If someone is focusing on the problem only and is not interested in learning, talking about, hearing or even acknowledging the root cause of the issue, do they really care about fixing the issue? Do they even really care about the issue itself? Doesn't seem like it. Especially if they only bring up the issue as a tool to distract and try to minimize or dismiss other people's issues.
It went from Paul Elam simply advocating for men's rights all the way to Roosh all the way to Nick Fuentes and Andrew Tate advocating for taking away women's rights.
There are good men. I’m in love with one. But good men, like you, don’t ignore the collective culture formed between men that actively harms women.
with respect to therapy. are there any online men support groups that are free?
my son has been looking for a therapist and we thought a support group might be easier to find.
he and his sister were hunted by their grandma (my mom) who was a psychopath and wanted to remove them from my life, for his entire childhood
so trauma recovery groups
I’m a bi woman that has picked a side (if ya know ya know).
Of men were like women. Operated the same level and were similarly as safe I’d adore a little man to be a house husband.
But they don’t and the risk is too high.
Plus I lean way to women XD
God I need therapy. I suffer way too much from not expressing my emotions. Also several other things, but mainly the first thing.
Try it. If you are serious with therapy it can be very helpful. But it's not easy. Really looking inside you can be a very hurtful process but in the end this is the pain that will actually make you stronger.
I freaking love going to therapy. I literally look forward to it. I can't wait to tell my therapist all the things I have been working on since the last time we talked. It's been life changing and I started back in june
❤
Commenting to get this more engagement - love how you break things down and don't make it about 'sides,' keep it up!
I decided to read some of his posts and replies for myself, and while you show what he literally said I think you’re adding on unfounded interpretations that don’t hold water under further investigation, making what he was implying sound worse than it means.
For instance he criticizes the use of the term toxic masculinity, but when looking at the details of that criticism and other things he said it seems he doesn’t have an issue with talking about problems that tend to get described as examples of toxic masculinity. He shows quotes of guys saying that the hardest thing about growing up as a boy is being expected not to cry and suppress emotions in his currently last post. Looking at the criticisms he has of toxic masculinity they’re that it could negatively affect the mental health of guys who hear the term, that the term doesn’t have a coherent definition, and that it misidentifies the problem. It seems that his issue is with using the term toxic masculinity and not with discussing problems that tend to be described as examples of toxic masculinity.
Looking at other replies under his posts about suicide he also criticizes mental health support for men but he doesn’t seem to imply that men shouldn’t go into therapy or that therapy for men would be bad if you actually read in detail what he says. It seems that his criticism is that there’s more research on mental health support for women than for men, and so talk therapy isn’t as adapted to help men with mental health issues as it is with women. Also he seems to be implying that talk therapy isn’t enough rather than that it’s useless. I think saying men and women have different needs is meaning that they have different needs in terms of how the therapist talks to them rather than different needs in terms of rather they need therapy.
My problem with therapy is that all you say is not confidential. There is a magic line that if you cross the therapist is required to contact the authorities. So for me, being open about my thoughts during talk therapy can lead to serious repercussions.
talk therapy was literally created by a man. freud explored the concept of dreamwork and the talking cure on himself. the psychology field was inundated with men until very recently.
also, where is he getting the impression that most mental health studies are done on women? like is there statistical proof (sincerely). cuz it's a verifiable fact that the medical field, like most fields, is centered around men.
how could the idea of toxic masculinity harm men when it implies the existence of 'healthy masculinity'?
quick recap, masculinity isn't tied to men. it's an arbritrary categorisation of traits shared by both genders, that boys have been socialised to embody more. the toxic kind is used to maintain artificial male supremacy, with men sacrificing their vulnerability in return.
oh frick off with the 'the genders have different needs' schtick. how's that been working out, you'll say shit like this then complain no one cares about your feelings. well, if you don't want to talk about your feelings because it doesn't help, why should we listen? both genders need a healthy balance of emotional discourse, physical catharsis and problem solving to be functional, incase you try to hit me with the 'women just like talking more' bullshit.
@@bobklein7366 what would you like to say in therapy that would require them to alert the police?
unless you're actively planning on doing harm to yourself or others, your info is private.
@@bobklein7366they won't get you for past issues that haven't been resolved, meaning they can and will turn into a current problem. Unless you're admitting to have murdered ppl you haven't been caught for, if they tell your business, you can sue and have their license revoked. But that's different from saying you have the urge to commit murder because you haven't done wrong, and you can still be helped down from the ledge
On a somewhat related note, I've come to the conclusion that feminism also sometimes promotes bad masculine norms and stereotypes.
One could acknowledge and talk about how men are individual people, and especially about how any given man may have mental conditions (particularly autism), disabilities or be part of one or more minorities, they may be gender non-conforming or they may not be straight.
But all too often, feminists instead focus on making sweeping generalisations about "men" that represent the worst stereotypes of neurotypical able-bodied cis straight white men, which isn't representative of the men above, and furthering those stereotypes are in fact detrimental to their lives. But anyone who calls that out is criticised for doing so, for taking offense at something that wasn't specifically addressed at them, even though those stereotypes have a direct effect on them and furthering those stereotypes is damaging.
Those same feminists will often criticise anyone who makes comparable generalisations about women or people of colour. Just imagine someone (potentially some years ago) asking "would you rather be stuck in the woods with a bear or with a black person", lots of people answering the bear, and then criticising other people for taking issue with those answers. I was fine with the original question at first, but someone bringing up this analogy changed my perspective. I don't have as much of an issue with the answers (you feel the way you feel, whether that's reasonable or not), but I do have an issue with the question, with carving out some category of people as them being the problem, even though that includes lots of innocent people who are judged for the misfortune of having been "born wrong".
We need to challenge and break down those stereotypes, not reinforce them.
And yet feminists get blamed for supporting non cis normative men. Feminists get blamed that non cis het normative people have any rights at all.
The question about bear vs man in the woods is completely different to a question of bear vs black person.
The original question was asked by a man wishing to generate a “controversial” response. Don’t blame women for the reality that men are a threat and danger to them. Obviously not all men, but we don’t know which ones.
I agree, when speaking to an individual person, it is important to see this person as the individual they is - with their personal thoughts, traits, needs.
When we speak about society however, we don't speak of individuals. We then speak about a societal group of people.
It seems very difficult to differentiate between the two. But it is important.
When speaking about "men", we talk about a societal group.
When I speak about YOU, I speak about specifically you and your individual thoughts and needs.
When I say "men go ..." I do make absolutely no statement about whether or not "you go..."
(You could compare it to a statement about "hospital stuff is highly misinformed about ASD".
This is a societal statement and therefore generalized. It is a valid statement to point out a societal problem.
But it says nothing about the specific hospital around the corner, which might be not open at all, which might be well informed or even specialized in ASD.)
Therefore: General statements must be differentiated from personalized statements.
Because:
Generalized statements are a necessary tool in societal discussions.
Concerning the bear question: the comparism with a black person is very flawed.
Reason: the thought that a black person is especially dangerous was always based on prejudice - no matter in what time.
On the contrary, that "men" (societal generalization!) are a danger to woman is no prejudice but historical as well as contemporary fact.
Here too, it does not make a statement about you and me, it only makes a general statement about men - in general.
I offer a different comparism:
You come back home and see a complete stranger on your couch. What would you prefer?
1. A man you know nothing about why he is here, what he is doing, what his temper or thoughts are, how strong he is, (why the heck did he break into your house? Does he want your life, does he want to hold you hostage? does he want to torture you? Did he follow you to your apartment?)
2. would you prefer a bear? (You can see the specie, you can do a good guess why he broke in, you can back out, you can be pretty sure he did not come to eat you but only wants food you have in the house, he will not follow you if you quietly back off) etc.
Think about it.
Which one's behaviour seems easier to calculate?
Which one poses therefore the lesser threat?
@@sandra.helianthus You seem to be responding as if I was talking about hurt feelings, which I wasn't.
I was talking about stereotypes and how those affect people (my comment used "stereotype" 6 times, and your reply used it 0 times).
My entire point is that a lot of these generalisations we make about people are... well, generalisations. Stereotypes. They strip away the individuality of the people involved, in favour of lumping them into a category that doesn't represent them. And when people get down to the individual interactions, those stereotypes persist and serves as the starting point or foundation for how other people see and treat them (and possibly also how they see and treat themselves). This is the entire reason why stereotypes are problematic.
@@sandra.helianthus "hospital staff are highly misinformed about ASD" - I'd say even there it's better to add a "many" qualifier.
But even still, it's not a good analogy because a hospital worker chose to be a hospital worker, and they stop being a hospital worker (in the functional sense) when they go home at night. You're talking about their career performance, whereas what people say about men are very integral to their character and who they are as a person. That analogy serves to strip away the emotion, the empathy and ultimately the humanity, from the discussion, but that's what the discussion is fundamentally about.
A better analogy would be making comparable generalisations about women. And I could easily find you hundreds of videos of feminists taking issue with others making exactly such generalisations. There's a significant double standard here, where it's perfectly fine to say bad things about men, and anyone who disagrees is just "being too sensitive" (feminists' support of men being open with their emotions is only skin-deep, and stops the moment they dislike those emotions). But it's not considered fine if similar things are said about women.
Someone might say this double standard is justified because of inequality, but making this argument would undermine the "it's not about you as an individual" argument. You can't have your cake and eat it too by saying generalisations are fine, "necessary", in fact, but then turn around and say generalisations are only fine when they're directed towards this group but not other groups.
Who is it that enforces toxic norms of masculinity?
Well as most men have never had any male role models. ..
Single mom never had a male teacher , school to prison pipeline. Teachers grading and discipline boys unfairly etc etc.
We taught, abused an entire generation of boys into believing they were toxic and defective.
Anybody who can't identify those behaviors (i.e violence, bottling emotions, putting down other men for being "weak") as social norms and recognize they are harmful.
Men or women can enforce these norms. An example I've seen many times by both is making fun of a man for doing something that is traditionally seen as feminine, like a hobby or a habit he has.
mainly other men. and the media they create.
Men are toxic , that's what they have been saying for a few decades now. Raised by single moms, no male teacher or role models. Who taught them to be toxic?
@@MichelleSmith-gt1py Men are toxic , that's what they have been saying for a few decades now. Raised by single moms, no male teacher or role models. Who taught them to be toxic?
You explained this topic very succinctly.
Same goes to toxic feminism
I get the feeling that the whole "manosphere" thing is just a reactionary movement to toxic feminism.
the patriarchy is a reaction to feminism. what?!
what is toxic feminism? what could ever justify men getting on microphones and advocating for our rights to be taken away again for us to be abused and dehumanised (a dangerous precedent when men have the systematic power to do so and have done so) because a couple of feminists weren't 'nice enough to men'.
No it's a reaction to feminism. It's the same things that were espoused when women wanted the right to vote
I'm here to remind people that a single observation point is not representative of the whole class!!!!
Soooo basically “not all men”? 🙄
@@redtothecoreYes. Exactly.
I'm here to remind people that the observation of society, does not make statements on individuals, but it does make valid statements about societal problems.
("Men" = societal group of people, grouped together to speak about issues in society
VS.
You = specific individual who might, but does not nessecarily and totally, fit the societal issues of that group)
Not all men...but A man
which again, is a talking point that exists to suck up all the oxygen in the room so the prevailing issues that are affecting both men and women deriving from toxic masculine norms that some men feel the need to measure themselves and other men against, many of those standards involving how men should think about and behave towards women.
It is not about assigning blame to each and every man(it is literally a man in the video laying out these points), but to deconstruct the cultural norms that leads to dysfunction and conflict because men's self-identity as men is made dysfunctional through an over-reliance of having to prove their masculinity through destructive behavior.
If you feel targeted by conversations that try to deconstruct toxic beliefs men have on a systemic level, maybe reflect on where that defensive reflex is coming from.
An embarrassing video full of blatant projection, you have just described almost exclusively feminist behaviour and in case it wasn’t obvious enough they are the ones in academia with influence over legislation. Opinions are beyond you I’m afraid given just how badly you’ve missed the mark.
There’s no such thing as ‘feminist behavior’ the fact that you are un-ironically using that phrase tells me a lot. The fact of the matter is that feminism, actually says it’s OK for men to cry it’s OK for men to feel emotions and seek help with therapy and medication and other means.
And you have proved his points. Maybe listen more and spout less?
here we have an example of a so-called "free thinker" being challenged with academic studies. Surely it must be the feminists who influence legislation and decided to overturn Roe v Wade. They must be playing some 4D chess we can barely comprehend.
Academics don't make laws. Politicians do. And they are overwhelmingly male.
What if the behavior you view as "masculine" is mostly a cosplay that society pressures you to perform? What if you could just be yourself, and not have other people shut you down and shut you out? I expect a lot of men will still like fast, loud cars and football, and that would be OK. But also you wouldn't *have* to like fast, loud cars or football, And that would be OK, too.
But I'm "just a woman", so what do I know.
And you're welcome to join academia at any time. There have never been restrictions on men recieving an education.
good advice for men i saw from a psychiatrist: men have a hard time recognizing and describing emotions in abstract terms, much like an autistic person would. for allistic men, it's a lot more social than neurological, but it still impacts therapy! tell your therapist when 'how does that make you feel?' is a useless question, it's ok. tell them 'i can't make out more complex emotions and i think that's a big problem', cause that's true for you, and that's what matters. and most importantly: emotions don't go away because you ignored them. they jsut get really good at hiding.