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

Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

wbur.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 1001 posts

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#271

Post by 93po »

MattGaiser wrote: post #2

> many young men don’t seek emotional support when they need it because they fear being perceived as weak and ineffective. I would be curious to see a study on what happens to those men who do seek it. As in every last case I anecdotally am aware of, that perception quickly became reality and those men regretted it.

As a teenager in the early 2000s, the times I reached out for help while being suicidally depressed and alone and very distraight, I was met with extreme discomfort from adults, or treated as a wet dog that just managed to run inside and get water everywhere.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#272

Post by kashunstva »

foogazi wrote: post #244
mattdeboard wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So would you say that the commenter you’re replying to needs to stop complaining and just fix his own problems? And that in general men need to quit talking about feelings of sadness and disappointment (aka throwing a pity party)? Because, my guy, lol. The irony is absolutely impeccable.

They are complaining but didn’t participate in the planning and therefore surrendered all agency Only thing left is complain why they didn’t think of him when he wasn’t around

> They are complaining but didn’t participate in the planning and therefore surrendered all agency

He noted only that the fathers were not recognized during the assembly. We know nothing about who was invited to participate in the planning.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#273

Post by WalterBright »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #131
caditinpiscinam wrote: post #29

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.

Misandry is normalized in society. Whenever you encounter a baseless attack on men just reverse the roles and you'll realize that there'd be pitchforks for treating women as anything other than paragons of virtue. Entire entertainment genres are built around portraying men as inept fools who can be looked down upon by the opposite sex. Seinfeld is one of the few sitcoms where a female character is as flawed as the me…

Blondie, Honeymooners, Flintstones, Family Guy, Simpsons, King of the Bronx, Bewitched, Munsters, Jeffersons, All in the Family, Married with Children, etc., are all the same premise:

Oafish bumpkin of a husband, the wise and understanding wife always coming to the rescue.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#274

Post by 93po »

znpy wrote: post #147
MattGaiser wrote: post #2

> many young men don’t seek emotional support when they need it because they fear being perceived as weak and ineffective. I would be curious to see a study on what happens to those men who do seek it. As in every last case I anecdotally am aware of, that perception quickly became reality and those men regretted it.

Eh, I’m gonna bite the bullet and give a quick answer, based on what’s I’ve seen growing up: Basically you get answers like: “Man up” “Grow a pair” “Boys don’t cry” “Life is harsh, get used to it” Last but not the least: “psychologists are for weak people with mental problems, not for you”. Two more observations again based on my life experience: 1. Weakness is generally accepted in girls/women, largely acknowledged…

I have endless examples of being mocked by my teachers growing up. Including some of your above quotes.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#275

Post by shrimp_emoji »

caditinpiscinam wrote: post #29

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.

[flagged]

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#276

Post by Natsu »

hnaccount141 wrote: post #207
Natsu wrote: 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?

The term "toxic masculinity" doesn't imply that masculinity is inherently toxic any more than the term "burnt toast" implies that toast is inherently burnt. Toxic masculinity refers specifically to expressing and enforcing masculinity in a way that's harmful (to men as well as women). Teaching boys to epxress masculinity through strength, assertiveness, self-reliance, etc. is totally healthy in moderation. Teaching b…

Attaching a word for maleness and badness is harmful in and of itself, though. And its not even a good term, because the name is constructed to make it look like being male is what's bad. It's far from the only term like this, see, e.g. manspreading, mainsplaining, etc. which are pointlessly gendered.

This type of recent linguistic addition really sticks out when people are working so hard to make language humane and inclusive elsewhere, while simultaneously going in the exact opposite direction with male-related neologisms.

And the last part of your own post illustrates that bad traits like being violent or domineering can be called out without having to pointlessly gender the terms.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#277

Post by infamouscow »

somewhereoutth wrote: post #270
macinjosh wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

:%s/men/jews/g Doesn’t seem ok now does it? Because no matter what it’s not ok to call for the death of any group. JFC why is this is hard?

The distinction is that Jews can and indeed repeatedly have been rounded up and slaughtered. Not something that will ever happen to 'men' as a whole class (who would do it? Women?)

What a brain dead reply.

So violence is fine because it's not as bad as some other horrific events in the past? The barometer shouldn't be the frequency of violence reaching a certain threshold. It's should be zero for everyone.

You should genuinely be embarrassed at this remarkably stupid and pathetic distinction.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#278

Post by zassy »

michaelt wrote: post #148
KptMarchewa wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think millions of gym rats are thinking something different? I think it's weird that you present this as feminine problem when it's men who on average participate in more sports.

Honestly, yes. I exercise to have fun, be healthy, and maybe look a bit better. But I know for sure I can succeed in business, in programming, in academia, in comedy, even in pornography with only a few minutes of grooming every day. Oh I know there are some men who struggle with body image issues. And the tiny proportion of men working as hollywood actors probably care about their looks a great deal. But do you shav…

> even in pornography with only a few minutes of grooming every day.

You’re either incredibly blessed or incredibly underestimating the barriers to entry to be successful as a male porn star.

Also Elon Musk and Donald Trump both have a shit ton of memes straight up body shaming both of them. Trump had literal fucking statues made with the sole purpose of showing him as fat and small dicked. People still often post the shirtless picture of Elon or the one of his hairline before the plugs to try to shame and discredit him. It’s absolutely wild and false to say no one gives a shit about it. His fans might not, but his fans don’t even care that he did a bunch of crypto scam shit, so that doesn’t really mean much.

He’s successful despite the body shaming, but women like Lizzo are wildly successful despite the body shaming they receive too.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#279

Post by somewhereoutth »

Gibbon1 wrote: post #117
caditinpiscinam wrote: post #29

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.

I've come around to replace 'insert group name' with the word Jews and see how it sounds.

[flagged]

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#280

Post by theoldlove »

foogazi wrote: post #240

> Fathers are also more likely to sing to and soothe their toddler daughters at night when they cry. 100 years ago father’s wouldn’t even talk to their kids. I don’t think dads even went into the delivery room Dad’s didn’t get time off from work to be with their wives when the baby was born or get bonding time Things are definitely getting better on this front

I was recently wondering about who was typically in the delivery room 50+ years ago. So when I saw my elderly grandmother last week, I asked her whether my grandfather was there when my father was born in the late 50s.

She was a little offended by the question (itself interesting), but said it was just her and the medical staff. No other support people. She thought my grandfather was at the hospital, but wasn’t sure.

Post reply on HN