The male suicides: how social perfectionism kills • Hacker News Board

Re: The male suicides: how social perfectionism kills

#331

Post by pikachu_is_cool » Fri, May 15, 2015, 6:29 AM UTC

smorrow wrote: post #311

Nursie wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they're not that different, no you don't need more sex than one woman can give you to remain mentally healthy, as evidenced by all the not-crazy monogamists. You're an idiot. If you want more than one partner, go for it, become a polyamorist. Lots of men and women do. But your generalisations and your attitude towards women are childish, you need to grow up.

I may have been exaggerating when I said mental health+, but it's still a fact that men still aren't getting laid as much as they would ideally like to=. I mean, how would you even know? Because they aren't begging for it constantly? Really, I can tell you that that's more due to being polite and knowing in advance that the answer will be no. + I term I use in a much broader sense internally, since I don't know any b…

What you're doing is generalizing people based on their gender; which is, by definition, sexist.

I'm not trying to harp on you - I have also been guilty of this not too long ago. Your experience does not represent that of all men, and your mental model of what a woman is does not represent all women. You are literally generalizing two groups consisting of 3.5 billion people, the vast majority of which you will never even see in your entire life.

> but it's still a fact that men still aren't getting laid as much as they would ideally like to

I'm pretty sure you're internally replacing "men" with "me" here.

> I mean, how would you even know? Because they aren't begging for it constantly? Really, I can tell you that that's more due to being polite and knowing in advance that the answer will be no.

Again, you're speaking for yourself here.

Re: The male suicides: how social perfectionism kills

#332

Post by pikachu_is_cool » Fri, May 15, 2015, 6:33 AM UTC

roel_v wrote: post #84

pikachu_is_cool wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going off of that Vice article, sometimes I think that a 40/60 ratio of men to women would be favorable... it'd probably reflect the proportions of our hunter gatherer ancestry, and a lot of psychological benefits would come with that I'd imagine. But everything else she said was extremely misandrist and sexist.

"sometimes I think that a 40/60 ratio of men to women would be favorable..." Without wanting to turn this into a race thing, there are sociological circumstances which sort of give us a glimpse (in subsets of the population) of what that could look like - and it's not pretty... See e.g. http://www.economist.com/node/21532296 , which is one of the lesser emotionally charged discussions of it, but I'm sure you can find…

Thank you for that link, that really changed my perspective.

Re: The male suicides: how social perfectionism kills

#333

Post by pikachu_is_cool » Fri, May 15, 2015, 6:37 AM UTC

Nursie wrote: post #309

smorrow wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

heh. Is there any part of that that's concretely not true? Humans all over the world have come up with it independently -- I dunno, unless Muslims and Mormons shared notes. I could even go further and claim it to be an almost pan-mammalian truth. Men and women are different. Especially when it comes to sex.

No, they're not that different, no you don't need more sex than one woman can give you to remain mentally healthy, as evidenced by all the not-crazy monogamists. You're an idiot. If you want more than one partner, go for it, become a polyamorist. Lots of men and women do. But your generalisations and your attitude towards women are childish, you need to grow up.

> No, they're not that different

Look at the testimony of transgender people who go on hormones, especially female-to-male people. There's so much anecdotal evidence suggesting that the male libido is out of control compared to the female one.

> If you want more than one partner, go for it, become a polyamorist. Lots of men and women do.

I think what he's referring to is competition. Since there are more women than men it's more likely for a man to find a mate as compared to a society where there are an equal amount of men and women (since it's more likely that a women he would be interested in is taken). Women end up getting the shit end of the stick, though.

> But your generalisations and your attitude towards women are childish, you need to grow up.

Agreed.

Re: The male suicides: how social perfectionism kills

#334

Post by bakhy » Fri, May 15, 2015, 7:35 AM UTC

hoopd wrote: post #289

bakhy wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would have been one charitable reading :D Of course I understood you as if you were implying that I am forcing something. Thank you for the clarification! I cannot really speak for others, I represent no one but myself. I can only guess that, to some extent, such reaction from some feminists is simply defence. The MRA narrative is too focused on feminism, and has too much relativizing, "who's the greater victim"…

Pointing out that feminism has been damaging to men and the male psyche is accurate, your movement has had collateral damage and you need to deal with that. It's impossibile to stand up for masculinity as being a natural and good thing without butting heads with THE group who says masculinity is an overvalued social construct that needs to be destroyed. On victimhood, it's completely childish for a movement to spend…

First of all, hypocrisy again - you say blaming patriarchy is lame, "default boogeyman" and so on, but you completely fail to see you use feminism in exactly the same way. MRAs typically blame EVERYTHING on feminism. Any kind of problem men face today must somehow be caused by feminism, there is rarely any other explanation that is acceptable.

Second, I did not say that pointing out problems men face is stupid, far from it. What I said was that comparing is stupid. "Who's the bigger victim" is stupid talk. Negating the problems women face, as if this were a competition, some kind of zero-sum game, is stupid. Try some of that charitable reading you recommended yourself.

Re: The male suicides: how social perfectionism kills

#335

Post by bakhy » Fri, May 15, 2015, 7:39 AM UTC

marrs wrote: post #278

bakhy wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, what are we even talking about here any more - are you saying men contemplate suicide because feminists make them feel bad about themselves? Because of sitcom tropes? Anyway, feminists fight for women. They are mostly women. They had a serious bunch of wrongs to right, more than just some unfavorable sitcom tropes. If they were not, during this fight, sufficiently sensitized to the problems of men, can you real…

Anyway, feminists fight for women. And this is the problem I have with feminists. We should be fighting for each other, not against each other. We are all on this planet together and we all deserve equal rights and opportunities. The idea that we achieve this by having women fight for women's rights and men fight for men's rights is absurd. It might have been inevitable to begin with, but we're not living in the 60s…

> The idea that we achieve this by having women fight for women's rights and men fight for men's rights is absurd.

No, it is the essence of democracy. I cannot go around preaching, protesting, speaking in the name of other people. Everyone must stand up for themselves first, and then, if their cause is just and recognized as such by society, wide support will follow. Waiting for other people to represent you better is completely ridiculous.

> ...this adversarial position...

You seem to be implying that if people stand up for themselves, they must automatically be opponents. This is not true.

Re: The male suicides: how social perfectionism kills

#336

Post by bakhy » Fri, May 15, 2015, 8:17 AM UTC

dang wrote: post #273

bakhy wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

P.S. The way Hacker News is "moderated" sucks. It was really easily predictable that this would bring me downvotes, irrelevant of how well or poor it may have been written. Dissenting opinions have little place here.

I'd say your comment was rightly downvoted because it was inflammatory, unsubstantive, and off topic. One needn't disagree with your views to see how that breaks the site guidelines.

That's naive.

Even when I'm not "inflammatory", I often get downvoted when I express viewpoints which are not exactly popular here. OTOH, I see comments, sometimes in reply to me, which are pure trolling, but nothing happens.

It's clear as day that the downvote is not used merely for moderating, many people who have the right use it to express disagreement. Certainly, nothing can stop them, can it?

Re: The male suicides: how social perfectionism kills

#337

Post by bakhy » Fri, May 15, 2015, 9:23 AM UTC

bakhy wrote: post #336

dang wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say your comment was rightly downvoted because it was inflammatory, unsubstantive, and off topic. One needn't disagree with your views to see how that breaks the site guidelines.

That's naive. Even when I'm not "inflammatory", I often get downvoted when I express viewpoints which are not exactly popular here. OTOH, I see comments, sometimes in reply to me, which are pure trolling, but nothing happens. It's clear as day that the downvote is not used merely for moderating, many people who have the right use it to express disagreement. Certainly, nothing can stop them, can it?

In the case of this comment above, I got a downvote from someone who agrees with me ;)

Re: The male suicides: how social perfectionism kills

#338

Post by johnny22 » Fri, May 15, 2015, 9:30 AM UTC

MrBuddyCasino wrote: post #140

curun1r wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're right about society's role, but I see a much more pernicious tendency that I think damages boys and, eventually, men. Society teaches boys to bottle up their feelings. "Be a man" means be strong, and don't show emotion. Crying is a sign of weakness. And god forbid you talk about your emotions...that's a female thing. But the thing is, those activities are what allow us to be vulnerable and what allow u…

> It's okay to express your feelings. It's okay to be vulnerable. I've thought about this a lot, and I'm afraid its not that simple. In competitive, male societies where a certain bluntness is socially accepted, you cannot unilaterally change the rules. You'll be a welcome victim to the schoolyard bullies. You'll be setting up your son for psychological damage. Having friends, doing sports, enjoying nature, taking ca…

I can't believe you're serious.

Re: The male suicides: how social perfectionism kills

#339

Post by johnny22 » Fri, May 15, 2015, 9:32 AM UTC

ryanx435 wrote: post #257

curun1r wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're right about society's role, but I see a much more pernicious tendency that I think damages boys and, eventually, men. Society teaches boys to bottle up their feelings. "Be a man" means be strong, and don't show emotion. Crying is a sign of weakness. And god forbid you talk about your emotions...that's a female thing. But the thing is, those activities are what allow us to be vulnerable and what allow u…

I'm going to have to fundamentally disagree with you. those activities are NOT what allow males to bond with others. it is OK to show emotion, but not vulnerability or weakness. male friendship and bonding is orthogonally different from female friendship and bonding. source: personal experience. all of my male friends and I bond through good natured ribbing of eachother. all of my female friends and I bond through sh…

As a male.. all that "good natured ribbing" really made my life a lot more terrible. Once i finally got new friends who didn't do that, then things went a lot better. I was finally able to be myself.

Re: The male suicides: how social perfectionism kills

#340

Post by smorrow » Fri, May 15, 2015, 11:11 AM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #319

smorrow wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having the same name as an often-violent crime doesn't automatically mean something is that bad. Squashing an insect and setting a mouse trap are technically killing, but there's nothing wrong with them. I think you first need to admit that it's at least conceivably possible that your emotion overreaction is compromising your objectivity on this subject. Unless she's bending it, squeezing them, or using a strap-on, t…

Again, Jesus Christ ! You dismiss the psychological and emotional trauma of being subjected to non-consensual sex as "a complete non-issue in terms of actual consequences".

Acting shocked at something doesn't make you right.

What can I say, I just can't see how there's much difference between 1) a woman being very forward with you and 2) a woman being very, very forward with you. There is a difference, but it's a difference in degree. If one is a good thing it's pretty unlikely that the other is a heinous, horrible thing.

I don't see how it would very traumatic any more than a woman hitting would be very painful: possible, but not the most likely outcome.