Live data from Hacker News

Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

wbur.org

191–200 of 1001 posts

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#191
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This is some next-level orientalism right here. On the assumption you're talking about China or Russia—neither regime is even close to "ancient". Neither has any meaningful organizational continuity going back further than their 20th-century revolutions.

I think he's thinking something else. Ancient enemies planning things that we can't even comprehend in a human lifespan. So some sort of conspiracy involving aliens, demons, Cthulhu, or something else.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> absent fathers issue seems like something concrete and impactful There is a general corruption of the concept of masculinity in American culture. It’s similar to what’s happened to the symbol of the American flag, but more insidious. When I say masculinity, or masculine values, what do you think of? When you think of someone who values their masculinity, who do you perceive? Now do the same for femininity. Which mo…

Can you think of anything feminine that takes more strength than motherhood?

> Can you think of anything feminine that takes more strength than motherhood?

Sure. Enduring this kind of misogynistic classification of their womanhood when they don't have a child (regardless of the cause). The idea that someone isn't "feminine" or "strong" if they haven't pushed a child through their vagina† is complete and utter horseshit.

† Take note sometime of how much crap women who get c-sections will get from society.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#194
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I think a lot of people who don't see themselves as "biased" still carry a lot of bias when it comes to gender, and it has an impact. ... > toxic masculinity Maybe we could make progress by tabooing words that frame being male as a bad thing?

Toxic masculinity is absolutely a thing, think things like refusing to admit you're wrong, being overly aggressive and escalating situations, being overly boastful, being reluctant to show emotions other than anger. A lot of people are just triggered by the term for whatever reason. You could just as easily replace "toxic masculinity" with the word "machismo" if it makes you feel less threatened

> A lot of people are just triggered by the term for whatever reason.

trigger warnings for whatever reason

it's a blanket statement, it gets thrown around way too often without apparent reason, that's why

Toxic femininity might not be as visible, but in many ways it's more harmful for society because it hinders collaboration on every level

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#195
post #188
post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last year there was some graffiti near my house: "Trans rights are human rights!" Okay, fair enough. Then a few metres later, in the same colour and obviously by the same person: "Kill all men!" People will say "yes, but it doesn't mean literally kill all men", and of course it doesn't. But it's not exactly positive, is it?

Some people do mean it though edit: radicalism is a real thing

I suppose, but those are staggeringly rare and can essentially just be ignored.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you think of anything feminine that takes more strength than motherhood?

[flagged]

I think psychologically that’s very difficult. Ignoring biological imperative and suppressing the physiologic desire for children is hard. Anyone in their 30’s and 40’s without children knows this.

But actually having a child and raising it in this silly environment? I don’t even want to imagine. Maybe just do private school and try to ignore the awfulness that is modern western philosophy and “values”.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#197
post #184

As a black guy I don't remember a friend ever saying "black people suck" to my face. But I've heard people I'm close with, both women and men, say that "men suck" countless times. I think a lot of people who don't see themselves as "biased" still carry a lot of bias when it comes to gender, and it has an impact.

Last year there was some graffiti near my house: "Trans rights are human rights!" Okay, fair enough. Then a few metres later, in the same colour and obviously by the same person: "Kill all men!" People will say "yes, but it doesn't mean literally kill all men", and of course it doesn't. But it's not exactly positive, is it?

Yeah I'm very left wing and in trans circles and that combination of rhetoric never made sense to me. It's giving in to the same harmful gender essentialism that generates transphobia (especially TERFs, who are basically entirely motivated by second wave radical feminism's silly misandry) so it's just kind of self contradictory, not to mention being unhelpful. Plus it's just... stupid? Like, sure, patriarchy, but one of the crucial parts of third wave feminism was seeing how patriarchy doesn't benefit all men at all, it only benefits a few, and even the mechanisms of their privilege can also harm men a lot. And saying stuff like that really does psychologically harm men even if they still have privilege (especially since they may not actually be in a good life position despite that). It's actually become a point of discussion in online trans spaces bc trans men have begun pointing out how harmful this rhetoric is — being made to feel evil and like "gender traitors" and stuff for being men, or, if they're excludeded from "KAM," being made to feel like men-lite. There's no winning with it.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#198
post #188
post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last year there was some graffiti near my house: "Trans rights are human rights!" Okay, fair enough. Then a few metres later, in the same colour and obviously by the same person: "Kill all men!" People will say "yes, but it doesn't mean literally kill all men", and of course it doesn't. But it's not exactly positive, is it?

Some people do mean it though edit: radicalism is a real thing

> People will say "yes, but it doesn't mean literally kill all men", and of course it doesn't.

As an honest question: why “of course it doesn’t”?

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#199

We don't need a critical theory of boyhood, we just need to stop institutionally empowering people who hate their dads. I know many good men, and the defining characteristic of every single one of them is that regardless of who their father was, they accept him, and by extension they accept themselves. If you are still mad at him or have contempt for him, I recommend considering how it's manifesting in your beliefs a…

Only problem is - objectively some dads are just no damn good. Are their children supposed to "accept" him regardless, and feel bad about themselves if they can't?

As someone who fully supports ejecting toxic relatives - including fathers and mothers - from their adult lives, no, they should not feel bad if they can't or won't accept their parents' toxicity.

Keeping toxic people in your life, regardless of their gender, is not something that somehow makes you a better or stronger person. And most psychologists with licenses agree.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#200
post #184

As a black guy I don't remember a friend ever saying "black people suck" to my face. But I've heard people I'm close with, both women and men, say that "men suck" countless times. I think a lot of people who don't see themselves as "biased" still carry a lot of bias when it comes to gender, and it has an impact.

Last year there was some graffiti near my house: "Trans rights are human rights!" Okay, fair enough. Then a few metres later, in the same colour and obviously by the same person: "Kill all men!" People will say "yes, but it doesn't mean literally kill all men", and of course it doesn't. But it's not exactly positive, is it?

[dead]
Post reply on HN