Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks • Hacker News Board

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#161

Post by enragedcacti » Sun, Jun 25, 2023, 10:55 PM UTC

version_five wrote: post #103

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…

> 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.

I'm not really sure how you got that from the article, practically the entire piece is citations of how boys are different from girls, just not in the way that we think they are culturally.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#162

Post by joshuahaglund » Sun, Jun 25, 2023, 10:55 PM UTC

dauertewigkeit wrote: post #4

Can somebody define what "emotional support" even is? I have no clue what they are talking about. From reading the article I would say men might need mentors who give them good advice and wisdom. That is what I felt I needed at times, anyway.

FTA: “The manning-up of boys begins in the cradle,” says Tronick. Fathers and mothers use far more emotionally rich language with toddler-aged daughters than sons, for instance. Fathers are also more likely to sing to and soothe their toddler daughters at night when they cry.

And "Praise them when they ask for help. Encourage them to share their struggles — with you, of course, but also with other trusted adults, a therapist or even friends."

And the article is full of links like this: https://www.irp.wisc.edu/resource/involved-fathers-play-an-i...

which suggests:

- Positive engagement: Involved fathers directly interact with their children in positive ways, including caregiving such as changing diapers and shared activities that involve play.

- Accessibility: Involved fathers are available to their children even when not directly interacting, such as cooking while the child plays nearby.

- Responsibility: Involved fathers take ultimate responsibility for their child’s welfare and care, including participating in decision-making regarding child-rearing and ensuring that children’s needs are met.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#163

Post by InexSquirrel » Sun, Jun 25, 2023, 10:57 PM UTC

geff82 wrote: post #37

jl6 wrote: post #11

> New research shows that when fathers are present and emotionally invested in children’s lives, they are more likely to develop a stronger sense of self-worth and excel in everything from school to relationships. Regardless of the debate on how tough (or not) love should be, the absent fathers issue seems like something concrete and impactful that we should be trying to address.

Maybe, as a culture, we should emphasize MORE the health of the family, of the duty and honor it brings to raise kids and less on the "perfect" romantic relationships of the parents? Shouldn't we promote a less Hollywood-like picture of long lasting relationships? I have the feeling that we are trained too much to think that our "romance" and sex life should last forever. When - in reality - a good relationship trans…

I've never understood why there is a dichotomy presented in relationships like that - sure, 10 years into your marriage you might not be going at it like rabbits as you were in the first year, but there isn't any reason why parents can't provide stable environments for children _and_ have strong romantic relationships still. It takes very little to carve off some time for one another, and that continued investment in bonding with another in and of itself long term provides the stability children need.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#164

Post by screye » Sun, Jun 25, 2023, 10:59 PM UTC

aredox wrote: post #143

davidguetta wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> majority of the hetero/bi female dating pool selects in favour of features that are often red flags for toxic masculinity This is so insane. Anyone who's been enough a player of the dating game and treed to optimise your strategy known you will end up becoming or (in my case) pretending to be "toxic masculinity" because it work so much more on girls.

Maybe because you spend too much time with girls who are "players" on the dating "game". insert meme about selection bias here There's a whole world out there of fairly normal people who don't play those games. They are not in nightclubs. Try to live an actual life.

Where are these normal people you speak of ? University and highschool dating pools are heavily gendered, as women themselves will profess to dating toxic dudes through college. Once at work, dating apps and bars become the only accepted dating avenues, both of which are heavily gendered. There are other soft-dating venues like Co-Ed sports and workplaces, but non-traditionally attractive people often do not have the "charisma" to read "signs". So they run the risk of being considered creeps.

I will be the first to say #notAllWomen, but every number is heavily skewed in a direction that promotes toxic masculinity.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#165

Post by opportune » Sun, Jun 25, 2023, 10:59 PM UTC

Natsu wrote: post #76

hkt wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally. When my kid was young and I was out with him the other parents (invariably women) treated me as an oddity and assumed I would be incompetent. Yet, many don't like the fact they're saddled with the majority of childrearing. Dating is much the same: the majority of the hetero/bi female dating pool selects in favour of features that are often red flags for toxic masculinity. This gets better as one gets older,…

>> 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

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#166

Post by paulryanrogers » Sun, Jun 25, 2023, 10:59 PM UTC

pyuser583 wrote: post #118

underlipton wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without evidence, I'll suggest that this is an oversimplification. In a model where boys require masculine modeling from older, adult figures, "absent fathers" are most an issue when a boy's regularly-accessible social unit has been whittled down to the nuclear family. That seems to be a crisis in-and-of-itself. When I look at socially-successful men, they often have had multiple older men in their lives to model the…

It isn’t either/or. It’s cumulative. Joseph Campbell emphasized the idea of the “second father.” A mentor who takes a young man further than his father can. A father has to love you, but the second fathers love has to be earned. Think NCOs in the military, coaches, sensais in martial arts. We aren’t just missing fathers, we’re missing second fathers. Not many people would describe a gunny sergeant, or football coach,…

> What sorts of institutions offer “second fathers” to young men now?

Must it be institutionalized? Can't this be encouraged without some one-sized-fits-all framework? I learned from a lot of guys in church related groups, yet with so much garbage messaging it made me hate myself. Also encountered some very good guys in school, forums, and LAN gaming, and without the religious strings attached.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#167

Post by tinideiznaimnou » Sun, Jun 25, 2023, 11:02 PM UTC

jtbayly wrote: post #134

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #53

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?

[flagged]

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#168

Post by epicureanideal » Sun, Jun 25, 2023, 11:07 PM UTC

opportune wrote: post #165

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?

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

"Machismo" is still a gendered term though.

Why not just describe it as "being an asshole", or "stubbornness", or "aggressiveness", or "being disagreeable", "being antisocial", etc?

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#169

Post by enragedcacti » Sun, Jun 25, 2023, 11:08 PM UTC

stainablesteel wrote: post #156

tbh its not just ignoring their emotional needs, painting this as an emotional needs problems just characterizes them as women and basically claims that men need to be treated like women, which is not true. its ignoring their developmental needs you need some kind of expertise to feel like you can make even the most basic of professions out of you need responsibility you need role models that you can choose and can t…

Were you expecting this 1000 word piece to address all social, emotional, mental, and physical needs of a child? I don't see anything in the piece that contradicts the developmental needs you list, except of course treating the need for emotional support as inherently a feminine trait, which is very well addressed by the piece.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#170

Post by jvanderbot » Sun, Jun 25, 2023, 11:09 PM UTC

tinideiznaimnou wrote: post #167

jtbayly wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

[flagged]

I watched my wife (and our lives) before and after children and I disagree. She was always strong, but nothing challenges her, or us, like raising kids. Especially after the toll pregnancy had on her body.

That's not to say it's the only virtuous thing a woman can do, but it's so incredibly selfless to continuously drain your body and mind intentionally for the sake of a child's well-being.