toxic masculinity

[oldschoolnitro]

Toxic Masculinity you say.... more like some poor dude born with zero masculinity secretly jealous of those of us who were fortunate enough to be born masculine ..my chest hairs have their own chest hairs and i'm fucking proud of it...just because you don't have these qualities does not give you the righteous position to criticize those of who do..put your petty bitch ass jealously away and go find yourself and stop worrying so much about the rest of us... got it ?

 

[Donald Mallard]

You are well informed! I have been told by a Preacher who lived there (and married a local Woman) that the idea of child sex abuse does not exist in PNG.

you know they are a long way behind what we call our developed world , and its not been so long since we were marrying off girls just reaching their teens , and we now consider this child abuse and look down our noses at folks that do exactly the same as we have done in the not so distant past ,, those bloody savages hey ... ..

i've read that like half of men there have admitted in polls to comitting rape. i wonder how many don't even admit it...

the post i made under the previous quote fits nicely in here too ,

omg those savages , like we have never done those things and in fact not that long ago ,,

shame on them,
omg in fact we are still doing these things ,
but why not look down on someone else and shake our heads ,
when we should ourselves be hanging them in shame ...

 

[Donald Mallard]

(Strange how talking about Men and their Privilege has brought such a reaction in these pages.)

This gender inequity, whatever we want to call it, began when humankind lived in caves. (At least that is what White History teaches.)

At that time the strongest males would catch the most food. Thus the strongest males were the ones considered best at survival and thus breeding. Obvious really.

Lots of time has gone by since, but it's only relatively recently that Society has thought about the genders as having equality.

The way we think, the way we have been conditioned, is by the past where inequity was the norm. The PAST is always here.

So today Mothers still teach their Daughters how to be attractive, Fathers still praise Daughters for being attractive. Because ... attractive young women have the best chance of breeding and survival if they look good. (Mmmm ... sees Big breasts. Hmmm ... thinks Breeding.)

Similarly Mothers make male chauvinist pigs out of their sons by treating them with Privilege. That is not such a bad idea for her because one day perhaps that Son will provide for his ageing Mother. Makes sense in terms of Survival.

Further in regard to male privilege, present day Social Science recognises the "Golden Child". Most often HE will be told he is unique, privileged, wonderful ... the implication being that HE will save both Parents in their old age.

For those privileged ones, there is a sense of entitlement. (I have it. I was Golden Child. My Sister who is quite mad now was made to make my bed as part of her daily chores!) I was entitled to swan around our home doing sweet fuck all.

So where I 'm going with this is that both Genders are locked into their behaviour and perpetuate that ancient behaviour AUTOMATICALLY. That is, Parents raise their children without thinking, or much thought, of Equity .

Seems to me we are locked into a Timeless Loop of Social Conditioning.


And this also applies to the way we treat Others with black skin.

seems like im picking on you quoting 2 posts i dont agree with from you teddy , but you post up your thoughts so i guess its aok for me to say what i think ,


firstly the generation you grew up in is how old ??

things changed quite a bit in the ones that followed ,
no its not perfect , but its a far cry from back when we were still riding chariots in your day ,, lol ...



second it wasnt the strongest guys that got all the food ,
it was the smarter ones or we would all be dumb muscular guys ..



lastly , my sister is nutty too , lol ,,



equality isnt about who does what , its more about how we are treated ,

didnt your parents set tasks more suited to your physical strength while your sister did more menial tasks suited to hers , or was she just your slave ??



i dont usually comment on these sorts of threads ,,

its dangerous territory and can be quite revealing...

but figured wtf

ill live dangerously now and then ...

 

[nepalnt21]

care to expand on the logic there? or do we just accept your word for it? is it toxic masculinity to protect your nation from invasion? is it toxic masculinity to stop a robbery or a rape. or to put out a fire, work for your family, protect your family etc, there are many positive masculine traits, just like there are negative masculine traits.

by calling toxic behaiviour toxic masculinity you are just being devisive and you achieve nothing good other then virtue signaling to the insane twiterati and those following in their footsteps.

at this rate femininity will be histerical, masculinity toxic, white people racist, black people crime prone and so on. don't you get it that makeing generalizations about whole groups is "problematic"?

we have words for rapists, gropers, perverts, mysoginists, and so on, use the correct word for the bahaivior. stop inventing terms that insult whole groups based on their organs ffs. you people want to take us backwards it seems.

unless it really is just about being devisive, then go right ahead, good job i guess.

every man or woman and anyone else is responsible for THEIR own actions. using that stupid, insulting and devisive term is putting all men in 1 basket, whether they be toxic or not, solely based on their cocks! how insane is that? how backward? where is individual responsibility in this kind of thinking?

what term would you use?

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

Hmmm - a heated debate - which is good - because it shows passion - and often passion is chaotic - so needs to be explained - somehow -

- Just now I was sitting on my balcony toking a spliff - and was thinking - where does our male-ness come from? - does it come from our blood/brain chemistry - our hormones - the balance of testosterone and oestrogen within us? - does is come from the fact that I wear my sexual organs on the outside of my body - and to procreate successfully I would have to use them as they were intended to fertilize a female of my species? - does one create the other - and if so - does that make me a male? - since I have always considered myself to be one -

- Male dominated or 'Patriarchal' societies have mostly been the norm throughout past and present human societies/civilizations - if you trace back to our closest relatives genetically - the Chimpanzee and Bonobo Great Apes - the Chimps always have a society ruled over by the biggest and strongest male - and from the looks of history humans have followed this male dominated societal trait for most all of our existence - for better or maybe for worse (in some minds) -

Bonobo's are as closely related to humans as Chimpanzee's - but within their groups/societies in the wild they are not male dominated - and it is the females that manage to control their groups with loving, caring, grooming, sex and attention to all members - and so they are much more peaceful - and not so war like - us humans have this 'societal trait' too from the Bonobo's - as we also have the trait of having male dominated societies from the Chimps -

- and its only in the past 100 years or so that this 'Bonobo Trait' has been manifesting itself in the West particularly - since women got the vote - and BIG steps have been made to give women the equality they seek and deserve - in the workplace and in the boardroom - but this is not worldwide by far - Still the 'Chimpanzee Trait' of a male dominated society led by males with fear and violence is much more prevalent on the vast majority of the planet to this day - and billions of women are still chained to a patriarchal religious ideology that treats them no better than being a possession of one man - without the same rights or worth within their society -

- These days most of us don't live in caves and have to fight the wolves off our wife and kids every night - most guys get their meat/food from the supermarket - so the need for a strong male is less - particularly now many people are armed with firearms - if they need to defend themselves - pulling a trigger can easily be done by either sex -

- As the Patriarchal Chimpanzee societal trait of male dominance clashes with the Bonobo Matriarchal societal trait - is that where we find this purported 'Male Toxicity?' -

* sorry to ramble - just some thoughts -

 

[gaiusmarius]

what term would you use?

i would use the correct term for the situation. if a man is a sexual pervert call him that. if he is a bully to woman call him a mysoginist. if he oppresses woman call him an oppressor and so on. its not fair to connect bad bahaivior with 1 sex. you can't just paint all males as toxic because a lot of males are toxic. be specific, bill cosby is a sexual predator and a toxic male. but that doesnt make every man a toxic male.

most men have an innate instinct to protect and look after the females in their lives, whether its a sister, mother or partner, or even a random woman on the street whos in trouble.

 

[gaiusmarius]

btw the US made the situation for woman about 100 times worse in Afghanistan with their war of terror the last 20 years. now if those Afghan woman talk about toxic males i could uderstand it. whats more toxic then flying war planes half way around the world to drop bombs on human beings in their homes.

 

[nepalnt21]

what about when it's a pervasive meme in societies? the 1950s housewife meme where we, in general, treat women as needing to be subservient? this is something very pervasive in some non western cultures, like i pointed out about afganistan and p.n.g.... and even some western cultures. armed old hippie pointed out the american south where we can still find culturally driven sexism, and there's mainstream rap and hip hop for example, which although exhibits some strong female artists also often portrays women in misogynistic ways.

and then there's the culture of the comic i posted, boys are taught to hold back feelings to appear tough.

women still have to go through the motions of not wanting to offend dudes cause they are afraid of being assaulted. it's so prevalent that i bet most of us know a women with a few stories where a dude asks her out, she declines, he verbally attacks or maybe even sexually assaults her.

i'm too tired to write coherently, but i was hoping to put some ideas out for discussion.

cultures, but also television like the big bang theory video i posted.

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

- maybe if we could summarize this whole thing in one word - I'd say TESTOSTERONE - the more of it around - the more violence - the guys/ethnicities that show higher levels of testosterone are more prone to violence - that's why men are more likely to kill and maim another human - just look at the violent crime stats - male dominated - as always -

* but the question always remains - that without TESTOSTERONE - would we have managed to get where we are as a 'civilization?'
-- without the strength and will to physically fight against our predators and enemies - would we have even made it this far?

 

[Weird]

lol did you read that theory on the bathroom wall of the local gym?

 

[Weird]

(Strange how talking about Men and their Privilege has brought such a reaction in these pages.)

"[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Most human cognition occurs outside conscious awareness or conscious control. Some of these implicit processes influence social perception, judgment and action."[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Most people are unaware that their own mind has programmed them in such a way that they can't objectively see it. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Look at gypsy's last post. I am sure his physiology benefits from testosterone. This need not be contested but it does not hold up as a means to address bias.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It simply is a correlation to how testosterone effects calm lucidity in a conversation. This does not mean calm lucidity is any more capable in anything but not reacting emotionally. It doesn't even imply the ability to grasp this conversation but since most human cognition occurs outside conscious awareness this information isn't discernible to him.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Doesn't mean this nullifies negligence. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]This is why the buddha said samsara is ignorance or in layman's terms most people abide to a narrative that their mind projects without even understanding it. Like dog's on a leash with an invisible owner.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Even man and woman has to find the desire and means to address this or they are subject to it. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Ergo the state of the world we live in.
[/FONT]

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

*an interesting article on the topic -

Strange but True: Testosterone Alone Does Not Cause Violence
Hormones don't necessarily make men violent, but they do cause them to seek social dominance

- It's commonly assumed that testosterone, that stereotypically male hormone, is intimately tied to violence. The evidence is all around us: weight lifters who overdose on anabolic steroids experience "roid rage," and castration—the removal of the source of testosterone—has been a staple of animal husbandry for centuries.

- But what is the nature of that relationship? If you give a normal man a shot of testosterone, will he turn into the Incredible Hulk? And do violent men have higher levels of testosterone than their more docile peers?

- "[Historically,] researchers expected an increase in testosterone levels to inevitably lead to more aggression, and this didn't reliably occur," says Frank McAndrew, a professor of psychology at Knox College in Galesburg, Ill. Indeed, the latest research about testosterone and aggression indicates that there's only a weak connection between the two. And when aggression is more narrowly defined as simple physical violence, the connection all but disappears.

- "What psychologists and psychiatrists say is that testosterone has a facilitative effect on aggression," comments Melvin Konner, an anthropologist at Emory University and author of The Tangled Wing: Biological Constraints on the Human Spirit. "You don't have a push-pull, click-click relationship where you inject testosterone and get aggressiveness."

- Castration experiments demonstrate that testosterone is necessary for violence, but other research has shown that testosterone is not, on its own, sufficient. In this way, testosterone is less a perpetrator and more an accomplice—one that's sometimes not too far from the scene of the crime.

- For example: regardless of their gender, the most violent prisoners have higher levels of testosterone than their less violent peers. Yet scientists hypothesize that this violence is just one manifestation of the much more biologically and reproductively salient goal of dominance.

- "It has been suggested that the antisocial behaviors related to high testosterone are a function of the manner by which dominance is maintained in these groups," says Robert Josephs of the University of Texas at Austin. In other words, if researchers were to study other groups of folks, say the rich and famous, they might discover that testosterone is connected not to violence, but to who drives the biggest SUV or has the nicest lawn. As Josephs put it: "Perhaps slipping a shiv into your neighbor's back might play in the penitentiary, but it probably won't earn you any status points in Grosse Pointe."

- One psychologist, James Dabbs of Georgia State University in Atlanta, made a career out of conducting studies connecting testosterone to every kind of lifestyle imaginable. In his book Heroes, Rogues and Lovers, he noted that athletes, actors, blue-collar workers and con men tend to have higher levels of testosterone than clerks, intellectuals and administrators.

- What Dabbs didn't address was whether this correlation was the cause or an effect of the environment these men found themselves in. Which is to say, are high-testosterone males more likely to become violent criminals, or does being a violent criminal raise a man's level of testosterone?

- No one really knows the answer, but a growing body of evidence suggests that testosterone is as much the result of violence as its cause. Indeed, both winning a sporting match and beating an opponent at chess can boost testosterone levels. (On the other hand, losing a sporting match, growing old and becoming obese all reduce levels of testosterone.)

- "The causal arrow goes both ways," says Peter Gray of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, whose own work shows that marriage and fatherhood lower testosterone levels. "There's evidence in humans that, just as in animals, testosterone is responsive to male-male competition."

- Changes in testosterone levels in response to challenges can be further shaped by our expectations. In one experiment that put a biological spin on the red state–blue state divide, researchers at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor had a volunteer "accidentally" bump into and then insult men who were raised either in the North or the South.

- The researchers hypothesized that Southerners come from a "culture of honor" in which aggressive responses to insults are culturally appropriate, and the results of their experiment bolstered that notion: Not only were Southerners more likely than their northern counterparts to respond with aggression, but their levels of testosterone also rose as a result. The Northerners, in contrast, were much less likely to experience an increase in testosterone.

- "From what we can tell now, testosterone is generated to prepare the body to respond to competition and/or challenges to one's status," McAndrew observes. "Any stimulus or event which signals either of these things can trigger an increase in testosterone levels."

- It makes sense—in the short-term, testosterone helps make both males and females bigger, stronger and more energetic, all of which would be useful for winning a physical or even mental contest. Testosterone is also responsible for libido in both sexes, and if researchers like Josephs are correct, it powers our drive for social dominance, which is one way that humans decide who gets to mate with whom.

- Arguably, the weak correlation between testosterone and violence gives us reason to be optimistic about the human race: Whereas other animals battle over mates as a direct result of their seasonal fluctuations in testosterone and other hormones, humans have discovered other ways to establish pecking orders. Which isn't to say that we can't rapidly adapt to the modern-day manifestations of our violent past:

- McAndrews's work demonstrated that one surefire way to raise a man's testosterone level is to allow him to handle a gun.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...rue-testosterone-alone-doesnt-cause-violence/

 

[oldschoolnitro]

fuck off with this shit...I know testosterone is illegal in California, no wonder the place is so fucked up

 

[imiubu]

.

 

[Sunshineinabag]

Real housewives of NYC
Nough said rofl

 

[nepalnt21]

btw the US made the situation for woman about 100 times worse in Afghanistan with their war of terror the last 20 years. now if those Afghan woman talk about toxic males i could uderstand it. whats more toxic then flying war planes half way around the world to drop bombs on human beings in their homes.

i think it's also notable, the rape culture within military.

correlation withthat and what gypsy posted?

 

[gaiusmarius]

what about when it's a pervasive meme in societies? the 1950s housewife meme where we, in general, treat women as needing to be subservient?

appologies for deviding your post like this but if you really are interested what i think, i need to do every bit justice.

woman in the 50's had the right to be angry and demand equality, no sane person will deny it. except maybe those living in the stone age. but they now have legal equality, they have the vote and outnumber the men. a woman who doesn't want to be a housemaker in the US can not be forced by anyone to be one.

as for subservience, that might be true in the middle east and Africa, but western woman are no longer subservient to men, not unless they want to be. the law protects woman from being made a slave. no one can force them to stay in an abusive relationship.

this is something very pervasive in some non western cultures, like i pointed out about afganistan and p.n.g.... and even some western cultures. armed old hippie pointed out the american south where we can still find culturally driven sexism, and there's mainstream rap and hip hop for example, which although exhibits some strong female artists also often portrays women in misogynistic ways.

so basically, sexism is not dead. but then, thats not what i said. some men are sexist, no argument there. afghanistan is reprehensible to its woman, again no argument. my argument is against labeling all males as toxic.

as for rap culture objectifying woman, thats a cultural issue i strongly disagree with. same with the rap promotion of crime and the gang life. but the woman that play the roles of strippers and whores in those videos are not forced, they do it for money.

and then there's the culture of the comic i posted, boys are taught to hold back feelings to appear tough.

you do realize that little boys are raised mostly by their mothers right? what so bad about holding back your tears if you fall and hurt yourself? you think my nephues would be the skating pros they are without developing some toughness to deal with the hundreds of times they fall off the board trying new tricks?

the truth is our mother didnt want their boys to become wimps either, its not just down to toxic males. boys had to become men, men had to defend the land. men are still all that stands between civilization and barbarien invasion, loot rape and pillage.

might want to think about that before you feminize all your men in the US.

woman are the ones who chose the strong male as a partner and not the weak cry baby. i wonder why?

women still have to go through the motions of not wanting to offend dudes cause they are afraid of being assaulted. it's so prevalent that i bet most of us know a women with a few stories where a dude asks her out, she declines, he verbally attacks or maybe even sexually assaults her.

i'm too tired to write coherently, but i was hoping to put some ideas out for discussion.

cultures, but also television like the big bang theory video i posted.

i don't think you have much experience in the world of dating, in general the woman is the queen. she chooses her partner. if anyone forces her the full force of the law comes down on the person, rightly. yes not always, but not all crimes are punished either. it's a choice between a police state where no crime goes unpunished, or a free state where some crimes will not be found out.

in the end woman shouldnt feel the need to be subservient and males shouldn't expect subservience from woman. more education is needed on this subject, specially for imigrant minorities. even the black community has very backwards views when it comes to trans people, mysogony and homosexuality in general.

all you realy need to understand is that ALL humans should have equal rights. lets strive for that noble goal in a unified way. don't split us up into degrading labels.

the ideal relationship is when they are partners in life, when each partner makes the other a better person, where each works to his or her strength to make their common lives better.

 

[oldschoolnitro]

these leftist men have an allergy to testosterone.. man bun wearing sniveling stick armed little crybaby wimps..using bureaucracy and bitch boy tactics to try to shit down on the real men of the world...

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

* some men are not a good example of masculinity at all - if there is such a thing as 'toxic masculinity' - then this fella has it for sure - he certainly was 'toxic' to many women in his life -

'Britain's biggest player' who bragged about bedding 2,500 women in a decade is jailed for four years for battering footballer Gerard Pique’s ex-girlfriend in string of jealous rages

- Danny Wagster, 31, repeatedly beat and bit a woman after a series of arguments -

- One of the rows involved a fling the woman had with footballer Gerard Pique -

- His victim tried to take her own life after feeling 'scared' of the violent thug -

- Wagster was jailed for four years after admitting to assault at a Manchester court

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ing-Gerard-Piques-ex-girlfriend.html#comments

* biting women's faces seems to be his forte' -

 

[oldschoolnitro]

* some men are not a good example of masculinity at all - if there is such a thing as 'toxic masculinity' - then this fella has it for sure - he certainly was 'toxic' to many women in his life -

'Britain's biggest player' who bragged about bedding 2,500 women in a decade is jailed for four years for battering footballer Gerard Pique’s ex-girlfriend in string of jealous rages

- Danny Wagster, 31, repeatedly beat and bit a woman after a series of arguments -

- One of the rows involved a fling the woman had with footballer Gerard Pique -

- His victim tried to take her own life after feeling 'scared' of the violent thug -

- Wagster was jailed for four years after admitting to assault at a Manchester court

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ing-Gerard-Piques-ex-girlfriend.html#comments

* biting women's faces seems to be his forte' -

hey pinky, your confusing psychotic behavior with the natural biological presence of testosterone in men ..just because someone has testosterone doesn't mean they are toxic, no matter what your liberal teachers taught you...