49
Why are so many boys and men feeling alone and in the cold?
(www.abc.net.au)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2023
49 points (90.2% liked)
Australia
3579 readers
121 users here now
A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.
Before you post:
If you're posting anything related to:
- The Environment, post it to Aussie Environment
- Politics, post it to Australian Politics
- World News/Events, post it to World News
- A question to Australians (from outside) post it to Ask an Australian
If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News
Rules
This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:
- When posting news articles use the source headline and place your commentary in a separate comment
Banner Photo
Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition
Recommended and Related Communities
Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:
- Australian News
- World News (from an Australian Perspective)
- Australian Politics
- Aussie Environment
- Ask an Australian
- AusFinance
- Pictures
- AusLegal
- Aussie Frugal Living
- Cars (Australia)
- Coffee
- Chat
- Aussie Zone Meta
- bapcsalesaustralia
- Food Australia
- Aussie Memes
Plus other communities for sport and major cities.
https://aussie.zone/communities
Moderation
Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.
Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
If you know what it refers to then why complain? Why pretend this is some big attack on masculinity as a whole when it's obviously not? Toxic is an adjective, it is used to separate the bad stereotypical attributes of masculinity from the good. No one is suggesting these behaviours can only exist in men and I don't know why you're so offended by the use of gendered words when we are specifically talking about problems associated with one gender. Enough with the manufactured outrage, engage in good faith for once.
I've seen this from men recently here. They are attacking words like "feminism" and "toxic masculinity" with crap like this. It's because they know they have no real arguments against them that they go for ad hominem attacks. They hate the word "feminism" because they'd rather have equality for "all" and imply feminism is equality for women only. Now this dude is attacking "toxic masculinity" because "women can be toxic, too" apparently. As if it wasn't coined because the predominance was found in men and was trying to call attention to issues men face. It's just a new tact in misogyny.
You're right, it is a common tactic from the right to just immediately present any given social issue as an "attack on X". But I also think instantly lumping people into that group isn't always helpful either, which is why I asked for that person to chill with the hysteria and actually elaborate on their point. Unfortunately they are clearly intent on divisiveness and meaningless point scoring, so at that point you can hardly blame us for assuming the worst of their intentions.
Rather than make snarky, half-arsed replies why not take the time to articulate why you think "toxic masculinity" is such a problematic term? Why not engage in good faith with other people instead of instantly trying to turn this into yet another polarised yawnfest argument?
Opening with "ah yes" followed immediately by sarcasm is snarky. And yes, 13 words is a pretty half-arsed attempt. I think you can do better.
Look I get the knee jerk on hearing male. "Oh we're talking about masculinity, that's an attack on me." But the topic at hand is masculinity.
Yes, toxic behaviors exists in both mainstream genders. Shallow ass women who play on male insecurities is a thing. BUT that's not the topic here. Like, you shoving the whole "but the other side" thing really comes like someone walking into a hospital being outraged they aren't going to do a quick dental clean while you're there. You're in the wrong place. There is such a place to go to, but it ain't here.
I mean nothing but love for ya, but the knee jerk comes off a bit hard. Like we can have that discussion, but honest, I don't think this is the thread for it. It feels like it detracts from introspecting by way of blaming the other team. I'm not downvoting you, I get where you're coming from. But I just feel it's distraction.
And that is my opinion on the matter and nothing more.
Is that what you think the point of the discussion here is? What you're saying is valid but that's not this setting. I think that's the aspect that might be getting lost with what I'm saying. I'm not discounting what your saying, what I'm indicating is that "your argument, completely valid in general. But are we not speaking specifically of this thread?"
It's one of those things of, do you want to speak in general or in specific terms? In general yeah, we cannot just toss the term toxic masculinity all over the place with zero context. That's just going to confuse people. BUT…
The starting of this thread is examining a specific topic among the many and it feels like you want to interject a side topic for fear that someone here might get confused about the specifics of "toxic masculinity" and what the background of that is. We're adults here and I think it's safe to look at what the original comment was getting at without diving head first into what (to me and that may be different for you so I acknowledge that) feels like splitting hairs.
Well. Are you a young boy? Are you confused about the term? And that's the crux of what I am putting forward. And it isn't in honesty an attack on you or at least wasn't meant to be. We can talk "in general" about a hypothetical young boy, or we can be "specific" and address what you are and are not confused by. But we ought to avoid strafing between the two loosely because that's going to be distracting in best light.
So I hope you understand when you have:
and:
Is taking the context of that first statement and attempting to apply it to the context of the second statement where the context of these two things are different altogether. "But the other side" yadda is dismissive in the first context and pointing out distraction in the second. We can use similar sounding statements in varied context to convey different ideas. Just like the statement "we need to go deeper" can have various meaning between the background of being on an oil derrick and being a gynecologist. Context really matters.
But then how will they subtly insult and demean you while still sounding like they have the moral high ground?
Well let's look at what you've brought to the table. Dismissiveness of folks who want to keep on topic and balme games for when your feeling get hurt by pointing out you're hijacking the thread.
So yeah, you're absoultely wanting to fix things here. You've done a banged up job thus far. You've acted like a child this conversation to everyone. You want an adult conversation but fuck you've acting in no matter of sorts. So, cool I think the convseration here is done. I've got better things to do than to speak with someone acting like a six year old who cannot even stay on topic.
Like how did you expect to debate things when you just wanted to keep changing the topic? Do you not know that? Everyone knows that's just a tactic people wanting to NOT HAVE a conversation do, to prevent the conversation. And then get upset and emotional when they get called out on it. That's what small children do. I was nice, I was giving you benefit of the doubt, and you just were like fuck it. So I'm calling it like I see it, you're acting immature and outrage that everyone is treating you as such. How SHOULD we treat you when you will not treat anyone else here in like manner? Hmmm?
So yeah, this talk is over. You have you and perhaps that'll be enough for you to figure out how to actually talk to people like an adult.
to be fair, the article specifically references "toxic males" and is focused on the challenges for young men in particular. What seems obviously lacking in the story is any reference to the diminished economic potential that all young people face. 30 years ago education and housing were somewhat reasonably priced and and generally available to all. Economic stress is a huge factor and immediate source of stress and anxiety that is completely ignored in the article. How is one supposed to feel 'cocky' while struggling to keep their head above water financially?
Men get so bent out of shape whenever they even could be considered at fault for anything.
Meanwhile the word hysteria exists...
No, people get bent out of shape because it’s a gendered, sexist term. End of story. Just like man-splaining. You can discuss male specific toxicity and men being condescending without using terms that very clearly are divisive and prejudicial.
If you use the terms while pretending to be progressive or for equality then you’re a liar and a hypocrite. Hope that helps.
It doesn't. Because this is a misogynist talking point. But you know that. That's your goal.
You should look up the origin then. Because your clearly concern trolling at this point.
The first fucking paragraph is the point. Literally everyone knows this.
And it's not an ad hominem when the position I'm criticizing and the term mean the same thing. Your bigotry is appallingly obvious. Shoo.
Well, yeah mate
'Boys don't cry strong silent type don't show any emotion beyond anger' is not a societal pressure applied to women.
It is however, very much a toxic version of perceived masculinity