Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Toxic -inity

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Toxic -inity

    There may be other threads where this is discussed, but I don't know of one where it's the main topic. Found in my Facebook feed today (from a nephew-in-law).

    The Real Problem With “Toxic Masculinity”

    All cultures actively promote different stereotypes and ideal types. Some cultural stories are nuanced, and others less so. Some are so simplified as to promote conspiracy theories. Some stereotypes are like mind viruses. Undernourished bodies become weak and vulnerable to infections. Undernourished minds are weak and vulnerable to mind viruses. All archetypes that promote crowd madness, witch-hunts, public hangings, and genocides are toxic.
    The next contradiction is harder to discern. In spite of its relativist claims, the culture of social justice actively promotes one kind of highly rigid morality about power, sex, and human relations. This moral story is then grounded in highly stereotyped models and ideal types of “identity.” All those who are not identified in the “cis-heteronormative white supremacist patriarchy,” then, get to leverage their “disempowered” identity status as a marker of virtue. This is an example of an overly simplistic, logically flawed, “superstitious” moral story.

    Toxic masculinity” (TM for shorts) is a highly salient, but awkwardly fitting feature in the conceptual architecture of this invisible contradiction. In the grander scheme of human structures of myth, TM is simply a worst-case ideal type: a fairy tale with some basis in biology and broad cross-cultural relevance. The TM myth serves the useful purpose of promoting socially desirable behavior among males — men shouldn’t be bullies, men shouldn’t rape. What healthy mind would disagree with that?


    In the current scheme of 21st-century feminist mythology, the TM story is also the Master Archetype in an archetype-hungry culture that pretends not to use archetypes.

  • #2
    Originally posted by swampfrog View Post
    There may be other threads where this is discussed, but I don't know of one where it's the main topic. Found in my Facebook feed today (from a nephew-in-law).

    The Real Problem With “Toxic Masculinity”

    Sounds like Jordan Peterson stuff. The whole Jordan Peterson trying to borrow from Carl Jung thing is so weird to me. Carry on.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by frank ryan View Post
      Sounds like Jordan Peterson stuff. The whole Jordan Peterson trying to borrow from Carl Jung thing is so weird to me. Carry on.
      He's obviously influenced by Peterson and others that think similarly. I would be more interested in engagement with the text of what was written rather than commenting on sources. Everyone has different interests, to each his own.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by swampfrog View Post
        He's obviously influenced by Peterson and others that think similarly. I would be more interested in engagement with the text of what was written rather than commenting on sources. Everyone has different interests, to each his own.
        But commenting on the source allows frank to dismiss it without even reading it. That’s SJW 101 stuff.
        "Discipleship is not a spectator sport. We cannot expect to experience the blessing of faith by standing inactive on the sidelines any more than we can experience the benefits of health by sitting on a sofa watching sporting events on television and giving advice to the athletes. And yet for some, “spectator discipleship” is a preferred if not primary way of worshipping." -Pres. Uchtdorf

        Comment


        • #5
          FWIW, the APA just issued first-ever guidelines for practice with men and boys. TM = Traditional Masculinity here.

          For the first time ever, APA is releasing guidelines to help psychologists work with men and boys.

          At first blush, this may seem unnecessary. For decades, psychology focused on men (particularly white men), to the exclusion of all others. And men still dominate professionally and politically: As of 2018, 95.2 percent of chief operating officers at Fortune 500 companies were men. According to a 2017 analysis by Fortune, in 16 of the top companies, 80 percent of all high-ranking executives were male. Meanwhile, the 115th Congress, which began in 2017, was 81 percent male.

          But something is amiss for men as well. Men commit 90 percent of homicides in the United States and represent 77 percent of homicide victims. They’re the demographic group most at risk of being victimized by violent crime. They are 3.5 times more likely than women to die by suicide, and their life expectancy is 4.9 years shorter than women’s. Boys are far more likely to be diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder than girls, and they face harsher punishments in school—especially boys of color.

          APA’s new Guidelines for Psychological Practice With Boys and Men strive to recognize and address these problems in boys and men while remaining sensitive to the field’s androcentric past. Thirteen years in the making, they draw on more than 40 years of research showing that traditional masculinity is psychologically harmful and that socializing boys to suppress their emotions causes damage that echoes both inwardly and outwardly.

          [...]

          The main thrust of the subsequent research is that traditional masculinity—marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression—is, on the whole, harmful. Men socialized in this way are less likely to engage in healthy behaviors.

          [...]

          It’s important to encourage pro-social aspects of masculinity, says McDermott. In certain circumstances, traits like stoicism and self-sacrifice can be absolutely crucial, he says. But the same tough demeanor that might save a soldier’s life in a war zone can destroy it at home with a romantic partner or child.

          The clinician’s role, McDermott says, can be to encourage men to discard the harmful ideologies of traditional masculinity (violence, sexism) and find flexibility in the potentially positive aspects (courage, leadership).
          You're actually pretty funny when you aren't being a complete a-hole....so basically like 5% of the time. --Art Vandelay
          Almost everything you post is snarky, smug, condescending, or just downright mean-spirited. --Jeffrey Lebowski

          Anyone can make war, but only the most courageous can make peace. --President Donald J. Trump
          You furnish the pictures, and I’ll furnish the war. --William Randolph Hearst

          Comment


          • #6
            some archetypes bad. some archetypes good.

            the end.
            Te Occidere Possunt Sed Te Edere Non Possunt Nefas Est.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Walter Sobchak View Post
              FWIW, the APA just issued first-ever guidelines for practice with men and boys. TM = Traditional Masculinity here.
              Yes, then they issued a clarification:

              Division 51, the Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinities of the American Psychological Association, supports all boys and men to live happy, constructive, and fulfilling lives. Masculinities are diverse and expressed in a wide range of ways.Courage, strength, bravery, compassion and self-compassion, leadership, vision, kindness, respect for others, gender equality, ambition, providing, protecting, intimacy, loyalty, social justice, friendship, and resilience are just a few qualities that promote healthy lives and social connections. When we report that some aspects of “traditional masculinity” are potentially harmful, we are referring to a belief system held by a few that associates masculinity with extreme behaviors that harm self and others. It is the extreme stereotypical behaviors—not simply being male or a “traditional male”—that may result in negative outcomes. For example, people who believe that to be a “real man” is to get needs met through violence, dominance over others, or extreme restriction of emotions are at risk for poor physical, psychological, and social outcomes (e.g., increased risk for cardiovascular disease, social isolation, depression relationship distress, etc.).

              When a man believes that he must be successful no matter who is harmed or his masculinity is expressed by being sexually abusive, disrespectful, and harmful to others, that man is conforming to the negative aspects associated with traditional masculinity.

              The APA Guidelines for the Psychological Practice with Boys and Men and mission of Division 51 encourage masculinities that express positive manhood. We believe that most boys and men aspire to live within a connected and caring view of life. We honor and respect the overwhelmingly majority of boys and men who aim to live fully human lives while valuing the dignity of all others. In short, Division 51 of the American Psychological Association believes the following:

              Division 51 seeks to recognize and promote pathways for boys and men to live healthy and positive lives, and also to identify and redress the effects of restrictive masculinities. We do this through psychological science, education, advocacy, and clinical practice. In doing so, we aim to promote equality for people of all genders.

              Respectfully,

              Dr. Edward Adams (2018 President)
              Dr. Ryan McKelley (2019 President)

              Dr. Wizdom Powell (2020 President)
              It was very nice of them to point out it's not nice to be a psychopath. The world has been wondering about that.
              Last edited by swampfrog; 01-21-2019, 10:09 PM. Reason: font size

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by old_gregg View Post
                some archetypes bad. some archetypes good.

                the end.
                That's an accurate summary.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by swampfrog View Post
                  Yes, then they issued a clarification:



                  It was very nice of them to point out it's not nice to be a psychopath. The world has been wondering about that.
                  Yeah, WTF?

                  When a man believes that he must be successful no matter who is harmed or his masculinity is expressed by being sexually abusive, disrespectful, and harmful to others, that man is conforming to the negative aspects associated with traditional masculinity.
                  When did being sexually abusive, disrespectful, and harmful to others become aspects of masculinity? Two of the three are likely criminal.

                  Hmmmm, how would this fly?

                  When a woman believes that she must be successful no matter who is harmed or her femininity is expressed by being psychologically abusive, disrespectful, and harmful to others, that woman is conforming to the negative aspects associated with traditional femininity.
                  Give 'em Hell, Cougars!!!

                  For all this His anger is not turned away, but His hand is stretched out still.

                  Not long ago an obituary appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune that said the recently departed had "died doing what he enjoyed most—watching BYU lose."

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Walter Sobchak View Post
                    FWIW, the APA just issued first-ever guidelines for practice with men and boys. TM = Traditional Masculinity here.
                    lol. What a bunch of pussies.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by frank ryan View Post
                      Sounds like Jordan Peterson stuff. The whole Jordan Peterson trying to borrow from Carl Jung thing is so weird to me. Carry on.
                      I've read a dozen of Jung's books, and Jung is a genius. That's not a term I use lightly.

                      Peterson is a Jungian psychologist. Why wouldn't he quote Jung?
                      We all trust our own unorthodoxies.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        In the bigger picture, a legitimate men's movement is underway.
                        We all trust our own unorthodoxies.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Sleeping in EQ View Post
                          In the bigger picture, a legitimate men's movement is underway.
                          Not being snarky I'd be interested in hearing more about what you mean by this.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by YOhio View Post
                            Not being snarky I'd be interested in hearing more about what you mean by this.
                            The Gillette commercial bro.
                            "Nobody listens to Turtle."
                            -Turtle
                            sigpic

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Sleeping in EQ View Post
                              I've read a dozen of Jung's books, and Jung is a genius. That's not a term I use lightly.

                              Peterson is a Jungian psychologist. Why wouldn't he quote Jung?
                              I like Jung a lot. I'm puzzled that Peterson has used Jung the way he has. Jung wasn't conventional, he didn't believe in the supremecy of the Western Myth. I don't think Jung would have come to the same conclucions Peterson did. If Jung were alive today I think he would be dismissed by someone like Peterson (Jung used astrological charts to help his patients).

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X