161–170 of 172 posts
A cynical explanation is that they talk less because on some level they know that talking tends to reveal needs that require money to meet.
I'm eating crackers until my paycheck arrives tomorrow or the next day, and I can say for certain that its a big part of why I talk less right at the moment. The plural of (my) anecdote is not data, of course.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't an inherently male trait, it's something that's done to boys from an early age in some societies. Men are conditioned to behave this way from an early age, and IMO it's a great tragedy.
As a male who identifies with this trait, why? Most emotions seem to just hold you back. Why cry about a situation when you should more likely focus your energy into finding a solution? For me it's not that emotions are so much "swallowed in silence and not talked about"... it's that they're fundamentally not useful. If I'm stressed out or sad or etc about something, that's something to be solved, not something to be…
I tend to find that experiencing negative emotions like sadness heightens my later perception of positive emotions like gratitude.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a male who identifies with this trait, why? Most emotions seem to just hold you back. Why cry about a situation when you should more likely focus your energy into finding a solution? For me it's not that emotions are so much "swallowed in silence and not talked about"... it's that they're fundamentally not useful. If I'm stressed out or sad or etc about something, that's something to be solved, not something to be…
So your don't feel sad about things you can't change, like when a loved one dies? I tend to find that experiencing negative emotions like sadness heightens my later perception of positive emotions like gratitude.
A lot of people romanticize the idea of men crying over smaller things. For example, someone below said that their SO cries then they even think someone doesn't like them. I've seen people cry when they mess up in their hobby of choice. These things are just not healthy to cry about. They need to control their emotions better than that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I already knew you’d ignore it - in your rush to dismiss you missed the section of preregistered analyses did generate statistically significant results. Exploratory analysis is not in inherently p-hacking. Publishing exploratory analyses as such is the proper action. There’s nothing in their methodology that suggests they analyzed a large number of possibilities and discarded the high p-values. (How would that even…
> I already knew you’d ignore it - in your rush to dismiss you missed the section of preregistered analyses did generate statistically significant results. I'm open to being proven wrong but I've reread this section a couple times and I'm pretty sure all four tests in the primary pre-registered section and both tests in the secondary pre registered section are all non-significant. (looks like there's actually two stu…
It literally is not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I already knew you’d ignore it - in your rush to dismiss you missed the section of preregistered analyses did generate statistically significant results. I'm open to being proven wrong but I've reread this section a couple times and I'm pretty sure all four tests in the primary pre-registered section and both tests in the secondary pre registered section are all non-significant. (looks like there's actually two stu…
> Exploratory analysis is p-hacking. It literally is not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and the insensitivity to it was always a problem. For who? Moral outrage porn addicts?
Alright. I'll bite. Why is it so important to you to continue to use caricature mascots that other people would find offensive over something benign like animals?
> Why is it so important to you to continue to use caricature mascots
I don’t give a shit about mascots at all. My complaint is specifically about people who concern troll on behalf of minorities that never asked for it (e.g. the Speedy Gonzales cancellation).
Whenever someone tells you something is “problematic” without giving concrete reasoning, they are likely just looking to be outraged and spread righteous indignation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alright. I'll bite. Why is it so important to you to continue to use caricature mascots that other people would find offensive over something benign like animals?
inb4 dang shows up telling you not to feed the troll :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alright. I'll bite. Why is it so important to you to continue to use caricature mascots that other people would find offensive over something benign like animals?
That’s not the question at hand. I’m asking a specific question about who it’s been “problematic” for. > Why is it so important to you to continue to use caricature mascots I don’t give a shit about mascots at all. My complaint is specifically about people who concern troll on behalf of minorities that never asked for it (e.g. the Speedy Gonzales cancellation). Whenever someone tells you something is “problematic” wi…
But I did ask you a question. I'll ask it again: Why is it more important to you to maintain racist mascots than it is to use something neutral in its place?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't an inherently male trait, it's something that's done to boys from an early age in some societies. Men are conditioned to behave this way from an early age, and IMO it's a great tragedy.
As a male who identifies with this trait, why? Most emotions seem to just hold you back. Why cry about a situation when you should more likely focus your energy into finding a solution? For me it's not that emotions are so much "swallowed in silence and not talked about"... it's that they're fundamentally not useful. If I'm stressed out or sad or etc about something, that's something to be solved, not something to be…
First up I'm not talking about performative emo culture. I'm saying that authentic expression of your true feelings is a key part of being a healthy human being no matter your gender. You don't have to make a scene. Just be honest. I'm also not saying you shouldn't use that energy to work towards a solution. Doing so is good and healthy.
Saying that emotions are fundamentally not useful displays, I believe, a deep lack of understanding of what emotions actually are. They're not some arbitrary human frailty, they're a finely tuned mode selection / behaviour modifier heuristic that is deeply embedded in the psyche of all mammals and (to varying degrees) all life. Emotions are deeply useful and can act as a communication channel between your conscious and subconscious.
In my own experience there's no such thing as "ignoring" emotions in the long term. You might consciously convince yourself that you're doing so but you're still building up an emotional payload based on what's happening to you and that payload will come out in some other, far less controlled way eventually. Certainly it's possible to cultivate some degree of detachment and so be less affected by the world around you but that just alters the balance, it doesn't remove emotions from your life.
To respond to a couple of your comments in posts below:
> There are many who romanticize the idea of men crying over small things, and I think that's not healthy or productive. I know many people who will cry when they lose a game in their hobby of choice, for example. That kind of thing is too much IMO.
My experience differs here and I feel this is a bit of a distraction/strawman. Being able to play games without getting overly emotionally affected by the outcome is a baseline measure of maturity for everyone regardless of gender and we're not talking about party games here. We're talking about, to paraphrase the GP of my post, "My dad [...] doesn't know how to talk intimately or how to reveal emotions." Being emotionally stunted in this way genuinely impacts your ability to live a fulfilling life.
> It's very reasonable to train yourself to not have those emotions and therefore not carry that baggage.
This is not only not reasonable, I don't believe it's even possible for most people. Either you're wired significantly differently to every human I know (which is possible) or you're not "training yourself not to have emotions", you're just in denial.
> There is an option to not have those negative emotions in the first place.
Again, unless you are very, very far from baseline this is not true.
> That's an extreme example that I'm not really referencing here. Of course I feel sad when something extreme happens, like a loved one dies.
This kind of thing is what the original conversation was talking about.