'Traditional masculinity' labeled 'harmful' by the American Psychological Assc • Hacker News Board

Re: 'Traditional masculinity' labeled 'harmful' by the American Psychological Assc

#81

Post by smhost » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 7:54 PM UTC

leereeves wrote: post #79

smhost wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's not "the other extreme." it's just a more objective view. it's just true that traditional masculine norms leads to circumstances where: > boys are disproportionately represented among schoolchildren with learning difficulties (e.g., lower standardized test scores) and behavior problems (e.g., bullying, school suspensions, aggression). Likewise, men are overrepresented in prisons, are more likely than women to co…

Men are punished more often and more severely than women who commit the same crimes. Girls who bully boys are less likely to be punished (and less likely to appear in the statistics) . Likewise for domestic violence, sexual assault, statutory rape, etc. You can't ignore the contribution of societal bias against men and masculinity to the outcomes you describe. Small biases early in life give boys a bad reputation, re…

yes, paternalistic discipline and punish structures are also problematic.

Re: 'Traditional masculinity' labeled 'harmful' by the American Psychological Assc

#82

Post by mcphage » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 7:55 PM UTC

js8 wrote: post #62

smhost wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the formula for small "c" conservative language-policing among post-critical folk seems to be: 1) identify a criticism of some traditional power structure (masculinity) 2) hijack the critical language and turn it on itself into a contradiction (anti-sexism is itself sexist) it's the same formula for everything from "atheism is itself a religion" to "anti-racism is racism against white people". to me it just seems lik…

This is a big misunderstanding. You can criticize power structures in gender-neutral way. You can say, for example, "social hierarchy" instead of "patriarchy". You can talk about "movement for gender equality" instead of "feminism". You can talk about "being asshole" or "taking too much risks" or other trait instead of "toxic masculinity". I actually agree with the feminist critique (for the most part), I think where…

> You can say, for example, "social hierarchy" instead of "patriarchy".

If you're afraid to even name the social hierarchy that we have, why would anybody expect you to be willing or able to put in the hard work of fixing its problems?

Re: 'Traditional masculinity' labeled 'harmful' by the American Psychological Assc

#83

Post by antisthenes » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 7:59 PM UTC

smhost wrote: post #78

leereeves wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> norms were previously based on the psychology of well-functioning white men. And now they've gone to the other extreme, declaring those same norms "harmful". I'm fine with confronting biases and accepting a wide range of behavior, but I wonder why the APA is embracing intolerance.

it's not "the other extreme." it's just a more objective view. it's just true that traditional masculine norms leads to circumstances where: > boys are disproportionately represented among schoolchildren with learning difficulties (e.g., lower standardized test scores) and behavior problems (e.g., bullying, school suspensions, aggression). Likewise, men are overrepresented in prisons, are more likely than women to co…

You're going to need to provide evidence that well-functioning masculinity results in poor outcomes for men in the way you described.

Nothing in the traditional masculinity framework promotes or encourages behavioral problems (and/or violence) or turns a blind eye to learning difficulties.

To suggest that, for example, assertiveness and competitiveness lead to such outcomes, is, at best an unscientific stretch and at worst - actively harmful by promoting solutions that have no basis in reality.

Re: 'Traditional masculinity' labeled 'harmful' by the American Psychological Assc

#84

Post by maccio92 » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 8:01 PM UTC

notacoward wrote: post #61

Very disappointing to see things phrased this way. Yes, certain aspects of traditional masculinity - suppressing emotion, hypercompetitiveness, risk seeking - are harmful. So are certain aspects of traditional femininity - submissiveness, excessive concern about appearance - and I don't remember an APA warning about that. Putting 'masculine' or 'feminine' at the center of this just isn't constructive. Address the beh…

Why are competition and taking risks harmful?

Re: 'Traditional masculinity' labeled 'harmful' by the American Psychological Assc

#85

Post by smhost » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 8:06 PM UTC

antisthenes wrote: post #83

smhost wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's not "the other extreme." it's just a more objective view. it's just true that traditional masculine norms leads to circumstances where: > boys are disproportionately represented among schoolchildren with learning difficulties (e.g., lower standardized test scores) and behavior problems (e.g., bullying, school suspensions, aggression). Likewise, men are overrepresented in prisons, are more likely than women to co…

You're going to need to provide evidence that well-functioning masculinity results in poor outcomes for men in the way you described. Nothing in the traditional masculinity framework promotes or encourages behavioral problems (and/or violence) or turns a blind eye to learning difficulties. To suggest that, for example, assertiveness and competitiveness lead to such outcomes, is, at best an unscientific stretch and at…

you might think that, but it's really the other way around. you have to provide (very rigorous and thorough) evidence that toxic masculinity is harmless.

Re: 'Traditional masculinity' labeled 'harmful' by the American Psychological Assc

#86

Post by notacoward » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 8:15 PM UTC

maccio92 wrote: post #84

notacoward wrote: post #61

Very disappointing to see things phrased this way. Yes, certain aspects of traditional masculinity - suppressing emotion, hypercompetitiveness, risk seeking - are harmful. So are certain aspects of traditional femininity - submissiveness, excessive concern about appearance - and I don't remember an APA warning about that. Putting 'masculine' or 'feminine' at the center of this just isn't constructive. Address the beh…

Why are competition and taking risks harmful?

They're not, in appropriate levels/contexts. They're normal, healthy, often laudable and sometimes even necessary. The problem is excessive (i.e. harmful or situationally inappropriate) competitiveness or risk-seeking, whether they occur separately or as part of a common/identifiable cluster of behaviors.

Re: 'Traditional masculinity' labeled 'harmful' by the American Psychological Assc

#87

Post by js8 » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 8:34 PM UTC

smhost wrote: post #75

js8 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"i don't see why language shouldn't reflect history, especially political language" I do see why it shouldn't (unless you are historian, perhaps). If we are to move, as a society, beyond the discrimination of the past, we need to drop the divisive language, too. It is why I think even the term "feminism" should be dropped and replaced with "gender equality movement" (perhaps in somewhat shorter, witty form). I think,…

if you're truly worried that language has the power to reproduce past injustices, you should be trying to part with the language of the oppressor, not the language of the oppressed

I want to part with the language that's unjust, regardless of who used it in the past.

There is a historical precedent, although it's kinda cliche. When communists came to power, former intelligentsia and bourgeoisie was often replaced by people from the former working class, and the people from the former were even persecuted. They even called it "classless society". And it didn't work very well. It was an attempt to rectify those past injustices, without consideration what is just here and now. So no, we shouldn't mindlessly take norms of the oppressed.

So at some point, there needs to be a line drawn, and said, the injustice is in the past, and from now, hopefully, there will be justice. And at that point, you need to stop referring to past injustices as a justification for anything.

Re: 'Traditional masculinity' labeled 'harmful' by the American Psychological Assc

#88

Post by CompanionCuuube » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 8:37 PM UTC

mcphage wrote: post #82

js8 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a big misunderstanding. You can criticize power structures in gender-neutral way. You can say, for example, "social hierarchy" instead of "patriarchy". You can talk about "movement for gender equality" instead of "feminism". You can talk about "being asshole" or "taking too much risks" or other trait instead of "toxic masculinity". I actually agree with the feminist critique (for the most part), I think where…

> You can say, for example, "social hierarchy" instead of "patriarchy". If you're afraid to even name the social hierarchy that we have, why would anybody expect you to be willing or able to put in the hard work of fixing its problems?

>> You can say, for example, "social hierarchy" instead of "patriarchy".

>If you're afraid to even name the social hierarchy that we have

The objection is not a fear of the naming, but how using it that way is reinforcing the causes that led to the existing problem.

Re: 'Traditional masculinity' labeled 'harmful' by the American Psychological Assc

#89

Post by CompanionCuuube » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 8:45 PM UTC

smhost wrote: post #85

antisthenes wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're going to need to provide evidence that well-functioning masculinity results in poor outcomes for men in the way you described. Nothing in the traditional masculinity framework promotes or encourages behavioral problems (and/or violence) or turns a blind eye to learning difficulties. To suggest that, for example, assertiveness and competitiveness lead to such outcomes, is, at best an unscientific stretch and at…

you might think that, but it's really the other way around. you have to provide (very rigorous and thorough) evidence that toxic masculinity is harmless.

That doesn't even make sense. The null hypothesis is assumed to be true, you don't go about proving the null hypothesis.

Re: 'Traditional masculinity' labeled 'harmful' by the American Psychological Assc

#90

Post by js8 » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 8:45 PM UTC

mcphage wrote: post #82

js8 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a big misunderstanding. You can criticize power structures in gender-neutral way. You can say, for example, "social hierarchy" instead of "patriarchy". You can talk about "movement for gender equality" instead of "feminism". You can talk about "being asshole" or "taking too much risks" or other trait instead of "toxic masculinity". I actually agree with the feminist critique (for the most part), I think where…

> You can say, for example, "social hierarchy" instead of "patriarchy". If you're afraid to even name the social hierarchy that we have, why would anybody expect you to be willing or able to put in the hard work of fixing its problems?

I am not sure what you mean by "afraid to name it". I don't want to mislabel it. Just like it's not Jewish, or heterosexual, it's not male either.

We know there is one mostly based on wealth and income (if you're in the West), and then there are many local ones based pretty much on managerial position that people have in various companies. In general, it is culture-specific.

I personally think we would be better off without social hierarchies (in short, money shouldn't play role in politics and economy should be organized as cooperatives), and I don't see mislabeling it as "patriarchy" helping in any way to achieve that goal.