Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 113 posts

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

#91

Post by smhost »

js8 wrote: post #87
smhost wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

you seem to want to move to a genderless language similar to the example you gave ("classless society"). i'm skeptical that that will work either, since there is really no precedent for that kind of postmodern language existing alongside successful emancipatory politics. also, as a side note, the soviets didn't actually believe that they had achieved a classless society, they thought of themselves as a placeholder or an accelerant, unless you're thinking of something else.

also, what you're saying reminds me of the novel "the dispossessed" by ursula k le guin where there's a civilization that has erased all concepts of hierarchy from its language and culture. it's seems rather dystopian, but maybe you disagree.

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

#92

Post by smhost »

CompanionCuuube wrote: post #89
smhost wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

of course it makes sense, just not from your perspective. from the perspective of the APA, it's on you to explain how these definitionally aggressive and violent behaviors that have obvious and immediate measurable negative consequences are harmless or even good. if these behaviors are good, then those good effects are very indirect and the effects can only be seen from a very abstract social analysis. but they're not sociologists, they're psychologists.

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

#93

Post by CompanionCuuube »

smhost wrote: post #92
CompanionCuuube wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

of course it makes sense, just not from your perspective. from the perspective of the APA, it's on you to explain how these definitionally aggressive and violent behaviors that have obvious and immediate measurable negative consequences are harmless or even good. if these behaviors are good, then those good effects are very indirect and the effects can only be seen from a very abstract social analysis. but they're no…

From the perspective of inferential statistics, the nature of the null hypothesis is that it is assumed to be true and only through sufficient testing, the null hypothesis can be rejected in favor of the alternative hypothesis.

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

#94

Post by js8 »

smhost wrote: post #91
js8 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

you seem to want to move to a genderless language similar to the example you gave ("classless society"). i'm skeptical that that will work either, since there is really no precedent for that kind of postmodern language existing alongside successful emancipatory politics. also, as a side note, the soviets didn't actually believe that they had achieved a classless society, they thought of themselves as a placeholder or…

"you seem to want to move to a genderless language"

Not really, I don't think language is that important, I think in the few cases I presented it just hurts the cause (because it makes it seem that it is about power for some other group rather than equality). But I am not particularly against e.g. gendered pronouns. But maybe...

"there is really no precedent for that kind of postmodern language existing alongside successful emancipatory politics"

I disagree. I think there are examples of emancipation where the language that was previously used day-to-day (for example, to refer to somebody with the n-word) fell into disuse. In fact, I think it's natural to happen if the emancipation is successful (because people will simply stop caring about the divide).

So maybe there will eventually be no gender pronouns.

I can't really take fiction as an argument, but I am reminded of Greg Egan's novel Schild's Ladder, which has humans in far far future, having no actual gender and even opt-in bodies, and ironically, the last thing that reminds people there ever was such a thing as gender, are gendered pronouns (which are entirely a matter of personal choice).

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

#95

Post by [deleted] »

smhost wrote: post #92
CompanionCuuube wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

of course it makes sense, just not from your perspective. from the perspective of the APA, it's on you to explain how these definitionally aggressive and violent behaviors that have obvious and immediate measurable negative consequences are harmless or even good. if these behaviors are good, then those good effects are very indirect and the effects can only be seen from a very abstract social analysis. but they're no…

[deleted]

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

#96

Post by dang »

wil999 wrote: post #23

Sounds like bs to me. Just some more far left rhetoric disguised in another insidious semi intellectual garb.

Please don't post unsubstantive comments to HN, or break the guidelines by name-calling in the sense described at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

If we take out the name-calling from this comment, there's nothing left. That makes it a bad comment for Hacker News.

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

#97

Post by dang »

sergiotapia wrote: post #13

Who specifically are the authors of this piece of flaming garbage? They should be ridiculed. https://www.apa.org/about/policy/boys-men-practice-guideline... First name on the list: Dr. Fredric Rabinowitz https://i.imgur.com/YeiuhcF.jpg The _picture_ of a man lmao

Please don't rant like this or conduct personal attacks on HN.

Would you please stop breaking the site guidelines in your comments here?

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

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

#98

Post by dang »

kstrauser wrote: post #37
sergiotapia wrote: post #13

Who specifically are the authors of this piece of flaming garbage? They should be ridiculed. https://www.apa.org/about/policy/boys-men-practice-guideline... First name on the list: Dr. Fredric Rabinowitz https://i.imgur.com/YeiuhcF.jpg The _picture_ of a man lmao

Uh, fuck off with that line of thinking. Alan Alda was one of the first leading men who was slim and "sensitive" instead of brawny. Is he not a man? I'm approximately 6'0, 230. I'm running in a marathon in a few months. I also have pierced ears (plural), like the guy in the picture. Am I not a man? Jason Momoa is a man. So is Woody Allen. Using someone's physical appearance to categorize them and dismiss their opinio…

Please follow the site guidelines whether someone else broke them or not. Your comment would be just fine without the attack in the first sentence.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

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

#99

Post by Izkata »

js8 wrote: post #69
smhost wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the point is that our history is gendered. i mean, the history of western thought is almost entirely white and male. if i want to take politics seriously, i immediately come into contact with the patriarchy because we all live in the shadow of great white men. i don't see why language shouldn't reflect history, especially political language.

"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,…

> It is why I think even the term "feminism" should be dropped and replaced with "gender equality movement" (perhaps in somewhat shorter, witty form).

"Egalitarianism"

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

#100

Post by kstrauser »

dang wrote: post #98
kstrauser wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, fuck off with that line of thinking. Alan Alda was one of the first leading men who was slim and "sensitive" instead of brawny. Is he not a man? I'm approximately 6'0, 230. I'm running in a marathon in a few months. I also have pierced ears (plural), like the guy in the picture. Am I not a man? Jason Momoa is a man. So is Woody Allen. Using someone's physical appearance to categorize them and dismiss their opinio…

Please follow the site guidelines whether someone else broke them or not. Your comment would be just fine without the attack in the first sentence. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Perhaps I used strong language, but could you clarify which guideline I failed to follow? I believe that I did not - and certainly did not intend - to attack the person. I didn't call them any names, or say anything unkind about them personally. I did wish to be clear that their harmful, pejorative language has no place in the discussion, though.

And FWIW, I'm asking sincerely. I'm not trying to pick an argument with you.

Post reply on HN