this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2023
45 points (100.0% liked)

Socialism

2843 readers
13 users here now

Beehaw's community for socialists, communists, anarchists, and non-authoritarian leftists (this means anti-capitalists) of all stripes. A place for all leftist and labor news and discussion, as long as you're nice about it.


Non-socialists are welcome to come to learn, though it's hard to get to in-depth discussions if the community is constantly fighting over the basics. We ask that non-socialists please be respectful and try not to turn this into a "left vs right" debate forum by asking leading questions or by trying to draw others into a fight.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

It’s perfectly fine to be a “feminine” man. Young men do not need a vision of “positive masculinity.” They need what everyone else needs: to be a good person who has a satisfying, meaningful life.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

it's questioning why they have to be masculine specifically when desirable characteristics among people are largely gender neutral.

Because young men exist, and study after study has shown that positive role models who look like the group in question have an outsized effect as compared to those from a different group. It's a matter of how easily a young person can imagine themselves as that other person.

I don't mean to argue against the degenderization of stereotypical behaviors and traits, and I've had plenty of role models who run the gamut of identities. But where is the inherent value in dismissing an identifier? We come to know ourselves through the similarities and differences we observe - what is gained if we think of one as inherently toxic? How much is lost if we abdicate our responsibility and allow regressive voices to offer the only definitions?

It's perfectly fine to be a feminine man. Young men do not need a vision of positive masculinity.

This is where my beef is. It's active dismissal of people for whom "masculine" is an identifier. This is an argument that there is no space for positive masculinity in social equity. If the goal is to destigmatize people being who they are, why are we choosing to stigmatize a subset of those people?

What kind of young man fears having a female role model, except a boy irrationally terrified of appearing unmanly?

I was hit for having emotions as a child. When my grandmother died, I was terrified of showing how sad I was because it would have meant a beating. I was terrified of acknowledging my female role models, terrified of the fact that I had them. I'd have loved to have a positive male role model! One who embodied the kinds of prosocial gender neutral behaviors that would have let me know I wasn't a complete outsider.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because young men exist, and study after study has shown that positive role models who look like the group in question have an outsized effect as compared to those from a different group. It’s a matter of how easily a young person can imagine themselves as that other person.

Right, and no one's arguing that they can't have men as role models.

I don’t mean to argue against the degenderization of stereotypical behaviors and traits, and I’ve had plenty of role models who run the gamut of identities. But where is the inherent value in dismissing an identifier?

The first statement leads to the second because again, if we degenderize stereotypical behaviors, then the label doesn't actually make sense.

We come to know ourselves through the similarities and differences we observe - what is gained if we think of one as inherently toxic?

No one here is labeling masculinity as inherently toxic. Just that it's a label defined by arbitrary cultural norms that are subject to change with a bunch of characteristics that are actually gender neutral (this is also the case for femininity).

How much is lost if we abdicate our responsibility and allow regressive voices to offer the only definitions?

I would say that if we have the cultural presence to project this kind of influence, that we should instead strive to move people away from this kind of thinking due to the above.

This is where my beef is. It’s active dismissal of people for whom “masculine” is an identifier. This is an argument that there is no space for positive masculinity in social equity. If the goal is to destigmatize people being who they are, why are we choosing to stigmatize a subset of those people?

I wouldn't say that this is stigmatizing anyone for being what is typically called positive masculine, nor does it exclude such men. It just calls for a small change in identity to one that makes more sense.

I was hit for having emotions as a child. When my grandmother died, I was terrified of showing how sad I was because it would have meant a beating. I was terrified of acknowledging my female role models, terrified of the fact that I had them.

I'm sorry to hear that your childhood was abusive and I'm glad to see that you've since been able to embrace your true self; it can be a very difficult journey and I'm always happy to see people overcome their hardships for the better.

I’d have loved to have a positive male role model! One who embodied the kinds of prosocial gender neutral behaviors that would have let me know I wasn’t a complete outsider.

Men like Terry Crews (whom I would consider a positive male role model) don't stop existing just because we laud them for their courage, bravery, and strength instead of their masculinity.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm sorry to hear that your childhood was abusive and I'm glad to see that you've since been able to embrace your true self; it can be a very difficult journey and I'm always happy to see people overcome their hardships for the better.

Thank you. I was feeling some ways yesterday thinking we were talking past each other (unintentionally, I'm sure) but I really do appreciate it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

It's all good.