Live data from Hacker News

Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

wbur.org

951–960 of 1001 posts

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#951

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original comment said, "hostile" to women. What you're describing isn't being 'hostile', otherwise one would have to say society is 'hostile' to children or old people. The goal posts have moved to 'equal rights'. But of course by that measure nobody had equal rights. A man couldn't do things that were just for women, and vice versa. The argument you need to make is that women had it worse overall than men at the…

I think there's ample reason for 'not equal rights' to be treated as hostility. The biggest reason is direct or implied hostile opposition to obtaining equality. There was significant rejection by men for centuries of suffrage and other equal rights for women; this is hostility toward women's historical desires and wishes to be treated as equals. Where it might be argued that individual men were only following cultur…

This is a, for lack of better terminology, a disgustingly bourgeoise view.

You must step outside yourself if you want to CURIOUSLY interrogate history.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#952

This sounds like they're not really taking into account boys needs, with the idea that we shouldn't be "gendered" when relating to them. This made me think of Andrew Tate, who is a douchebag, but has a huge following with young men, apparently because he has found a way to appeal to them emotionally. Anyone who is looking at how to push boys in the right direction should look at what appeals to them and meet them whe…

I think this nails the heart of the problem. We've empowered women and assumed men would be able to continue an as we always have. The issue is that the world has changed but none of the education has. No one is sitting down young boys and teaching them to be better. I only developed emotionally because my parents were smart and got me therapy. When we focus on teaching girls since we've been neglecting them that we've failed to extend that to boys.

Just as society has historically dissuaded women from pursuing stem it has historically dissuaded men from growing emotionally. We've started to tackle that first element but I truly believe that the second one is the next breakthrough. As it is, men like Andrew Tate are trying to fill that void. I think this is because we as a society have failed to lift up boys and give them healthy role models

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#953
post #878

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I mean, yes there always were and always will be some abusive men, but men _as a group_ have been more associated with protecting and caring for women than being hostile to them. As much a slaveowner has been "protecting and caring" for his slaves.

I spotted the American! Seriously though, it does absolutely no good to anyone if you make such a snide remark. Even if you'd be right, what's to be done next from that statement?

I'm Polish.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#954

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting that when people talk about having another child there is almost always the implicit assumption of maintaining at least the same lifestyle. I was quite amused that in your comment you explicitly talk about expanding your lifestyle to have another child: "the need for a larger car and possibly larger house". Poor people have more children than well off people until you hit top >1% incomes. Economics i…

> Economics is not the thing stopping people from having kids, reduction in lifestyle is. Technically you're somewhat correct, because it sucks to have kids when you know they'll be raised by an economically poorer you. And as most of the people don't see themselves as economically stable given the socio-economic conditions that have been in place for the last 15-20 years, that means that many people give up having k…

The problem with "only scraping by" is that a lot of people have very high baselines for "scraping by".

"I'm barely scraping by", says the person with an above average income, living in an expensive city, frequently going out, going on multiple vacations per year, buying luxury items, etc.

People who are actually scraping by do not talk about needing to buy a bigger house if they have more kids, because they literally cannot afford that.

https://twitter.com/kitten_beloved/status/166761594887723417...

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#955

In the nineties I joined a men's group retreat where we circled up and listened to each other's struggles, gave lots of support, and lots of hugs. Then we did some consciousness raising around circumcision and it's barbarity. We took our cue from the Feminist movement. They were getting their shit together and so could we. Gary Snyder read his gorgeous nature poetry, Peter Berg sold us on a green cities concept that…

> In the nineties I joined a men's group retreat where we circled up and listened to each other's struggles, gave lots of support, and lots of hugs. Then we did some consciousness raising around circumcision and it's barbarity. We took our cue from the Feminist movement. They were getting their shit together and so could we. Gary Snyder read his gorgeous nature poetry, Peter Berg sold us on a green cities concept tha…

This is true enough. We didn't get very far before the backlash set in. We were seen by some as feminized men who were traitors to our gender, which I take as a great honor. There were so many obstacles to overcome:

* Straight and gay men talking about emotions and hugging * Men confronting unearned privileges * Men confronting their own unjustified anger and aggression * Men trying to gain emotional intelligence to understand and control their moods and triggers * Men grappling with women invading traditionally men-only spaces

So it was absolutely a hard sell. But so is every other anti-oppression movement. No one expected to eliminate a millennia-old system overnight. The thing is, when you're right, you're right. Regressives can't keep a good idea down forever. The progress I've seen in my short lifetime confirms this.

Even if anti-feminists succeed in their efforts to overthrowing democracy and bringing about a patriarchal authoritarian state the gain will be temporary and we will return in force. After denial, anger, bargaining, and depression, comes acceptance.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#956
post #568

In the nineties I joined a men's group retreat where we circled up and listened to each other's struggles, gave lots of support, and lots of hugs. Then we did some consciousness raising around circumcision and it's barbarity. We took our cue from the Feminist movement. They were getting their shit together and so could we. Gary Snyder read his gorgeous nature poetry, Peter Berg sold us on a green cities concept that…

According to this article[1] from mother jones Warren Farrell is considered to be the founder back in the 80s: "Farrell is widely considered to be the father of the men’s rights movement. In a series of books published since the 1980s, he has made the case that the primary victims of gender-based discrimination are men—casualties of a society that relies on their sacrifices while ignoring their suffering. He blames t…

I never heard of him at the time. I only know him in his aggrieved jilted lover incarnation and didn't care for it.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#957

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> measurable and quantifiable differences would you expect to see. Amount of psycological trauma and repression, neuroticism, insecurity. Suicides. All easilly measurable.

define trauma. sometimes kids need to learn hard lessons. where is that line? define repression? given that this is HN I'd imagine the definition will be different than from someone who was from, say, Malaysia or Saudi. what does neuroticism mean? at some level we can agree what "crazy is" but where do you draw the line? ditto for insecurity. most of this is NOT easily measurable, outside of suicides, which are discr…

> definition of things like sexual assault, child abuse, or repression vary by state

Definition of homicide also varies by state, so what? Homicide is not real?

So basically you do not believe we can objectively measure psychological issues, so any parenting, no matter how bad, even outright abusive parenting, can't produce psychological issues.

Why do we have parents at all then, let's have all kids cared for by a commercial company, will be more efficient, right?

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#958

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a similar sentiment. I remember growing up with jocks and bullies and really not identifying with the whole “group showers and snapping towels at asses” masculinity not pleasant and spent a lot of time getting beaten up or avoiding being beaten up. So at first I liked the pushback against toxic masculinity as I didn’t like jerk men. But then the concept expanded to everything. “Mansplaining” isn’t something un…

> not identifying with the whole “group showers and snapping towels at asses” masculinity Me, neither. And, in fact, I've never met anybody who did. Have you ever noticed how many of the movies we grew up watching were about a "shy, sensitive boy" who "wasn't like the jocks" who ended up getting the girl in the end? Ever notice how that trope appealed to almost everybody? That's because that's how everybody remembers…

I went to a school with 1000 men. There were hundreds who identified with the towel ass slappers. And I have friends who still do.

In my high school the jocks got the girl. Movies are fantasy and there was no sensitive kid who got the prom queen. At least for the limited experience I had.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#959

In the nineties I joined a men's group retreat where we circled up and listened to each other's struggles, gave lots of support, and lots of hugs. Then we did some consciousness raising around circumcision and it's barbarity. We took our cue from the Feminist movement. They were getting their shit together and so could we. Gary Snyder read his gorgeous nature poetry, Peter Berg sold us on a green cities concept that…

I have a different perspective on this: I'm a man who's currently deeply lonely, depressed, and struggling with poor self-esteem. I hear feminists talking about "toxic masculinity". But none of what they say feels applicable to me. I've never been violent; I'm currently trying therapy for the third time; and I can't remember even a single time when someone told me to "man up". So, while I'm sure toxic masculinity is…

I appreciate your thoughtful and heartfelt reply. I can relate so much to what you're saying. I too am depressed, deeply lonely, and struggling with poor self-esteem. I've dealt with chronic illness, PTSD from watching a few people die badly and one living death [worse], poverty, and frequent homelessness.

On "Men suck!"

I can understand how hurtful could be, but it never personally bothered me. Oppressed people let off steam in all sorts of ways and some of those ways are unfair. But compare "Men suck" to "Billionaires suck", "Cops suck", "White people suck" etc. Do all of those bother you equally? The fact is that waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too many men do suck in so many ways while being perfectly lovely in so many other ways. Rapey, dominating, violent, criminal, oligarchic, etc. People who have been harmed by such men have an absolute right to vent. I've got friends who regularly bitch about White people in front of me. It does not bother me. White people do suck in so many ways. And even though I don't have an "All Lives Matter" sticker on my truck, I know that even I exhibit some racist thinking and behavior my self and that I benefit from a racist system.

My only recommendation is to seek understand the hurt behind the speaker's statements. Empathy with their suffering may help explain why they are acting out.

On Popular Feminism

I would never suggest that popular feminism isn't feminism. We are what we do. And yet, not all who identify as feminists are particularly good at it. WitchesvsPatriarchy, for example, strikes me as a rather immature expression for young women who are just beginning to work out their relationship to the world. This is valuable for them and us. People need a playpen where they can develop. Just as we expect college students to express the dumbest, most strident, and self-defeating version of whatever political philosophy they have adopted, we must recognize that newbies are stupid in every discipline.

There are, of course, terrible people who are feminists. There are those who simply use feminism as a cudgel to gain status.

And there is a Imperial shit ton of anti-feminists who parody feminist positions in memes. I am ogen accused of supporting a "feminism" which I do not recognize.

One of the rules for good debate is to argue against the best possible version of your opponent's argument. This is hard to do in the context of a well that has been poisoned by those who spew falsehood so hard and fast that it's difficult to sort the true from the false. And yet, there are plenty of coherent and internally-consistent feminisms to be found for those who can put the effort in to find them. I wish we were doing a better job to make things easier for those trying to make sense of things.

On Negative Stereotypes

The stereotypes are too often true. I have never raped or abducted a child, but when a parent gets nervous around me for being too close to a child, I just have to swallow my indignation and realize that the actions of others have ruined things for me.

The men loudest about "Not all men!" are those who never made an effort to understand the critiques in the first place.

And yet, these stereotypes are hurtful. Especially to men already struggling. The only advice I have is to do your part to build a world where these stereotypes have no basis in reality. In the mean time, thicken your skin. If you're not the creepy type, then realize that such unfair statements do not apply to you.

On Navigating Relationships

I'm gay and can't imagine how hard this must be. Straight people have such overwhelming and conflicting social expectations laid on them, that I don't know how they even function. We queers are used to making things up as we go along. There's a freedom to being a hated outsider.

So I guess my advice would be to make things up as you go along. Ignore all the advice you've ever heard about what women want. And listen to the specific individual that you are interested in. The are few interpersonal problems that can't be resolved by prompt, honest, and empathetic communication, and there are few problems between people that can't be made MUCH worse by the lack thereof. Listen. Express. Compromise. Repeat.

As a Christian, my faith tells me that we are each divine beings made in God's image. This informs how I treat my partner. Even when they are acting badly I try to remember that they have infinite Godlike potential within them and that my love for them can help them reconnect with their deeper nature. Indeed this is the point of a relationship. In bell hook's book "All About Love" (highly recommended} she suggest that romantic love is not about the pleasure of fucking or feelings of infatuation, but about a desire to see your partner realize their highest potential. When you start from that perspective, the specifics of the relationship become much easier to work out. The problem is when we see our partner as a fuck toy built for our pleasure and service. That is not a loving frame for a relationship, and only exploitation is possible from that position.

Under patriarchy, women are seen as servants who clean, nurture, and cook for men. This attitude is the root of so much suffering for both genders. I knew a guy who never learned to cook, ate ramen and canned spaghetti daily, and was way too desperate and lame to find a woman to serve him. Patriarchal expectation left him unable to even care for himself. His only solution was to try to trick some poor soul into being his servant.

Men and Feminism

Feminism started with women and has been primarily focused on their needs and the harms to them under sexism. It took quite a while for people to realize that men also suffer from the system. But women who have been harmed are focused on their own resolution and are under no obligation to develop feminisms focused on men's needs. That's our job and we simply have not done enough of the work to present a comprehensive, well documented, easy-to-understand feminism that addresses men's needs.

So if you feel like feminism isn't focused on you, you are absolutely correct. In an emergency, you put on your own mask first, even before your own child. The version of feminism we need isn't written yet. That's why it is important for men to introspect deeply over these issues, to take up the tools and clues previous feminists have left us, and to build what we need.

Think of the project of creating a men-focused feminism in terms of programming. You've found a project on Github that looks close to what you needed, but whole chunks are missing for your use case. No logging, no authentication, no input sanitization, random open ports everywhere. These you will have to write yourself. But that is still much easier than starting from scratch.

I hope this unpolished rant addresses the issues at least some of the issues you raised.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#960

In the nineties I joined a men's group retreat where we circled up and listened to each other's struggles, gave lots of support, and lots of hugs. Then we did some consciousness raising around circumcision and it's barbarity. We took our cue from the Feminist movement. They were getting their shit together and so could we. Gary Snyder read his gorgeous nature poetry, Peter Berg sold us on a green cities concept that…

> Step one to improving the situation for men is to destroy the right-wing MRM. Step one is building the future you want to see. Step one isn't waging a cultural battle. A well articulated alternative might even sap the wind from it's sails. But if you want to wage war without anything else to offer them... you'll just be entrenching the status quo. Connecting to men might require discussing sore cultural subjects wi…

Point taken. It is much better to build up than to tear down.
Post reply on HN