Taking this post from the Gender thread to avoid derailing it....
So in this post ten attributes are shown, and the poster seems to believe that these things are important to being a man. I just want to look a little closer and see if they are, or if they can be an issue.
Stoicism (The endurance of pain or hardship without the display of feelings and without complaint.)
Is this really a good thing? We have been teaching men that the display of feelings and emotion is weak and that men should just tough it up and not complain. Modern medicine seems to disagree with this philosophy showing that this repression of emotions can lead to mental disorders, explosive outbursts and PTSD. So should men really be excessively stoic?
Competitiveness (Possession of a strong desire to be more successful than others.)
While some competition is certainly a good thing, as it makes us strive to be better, both with men and women, the question here is should we set our goals and competitiveness against what others can do, or against what we have done previously. If we use competitiveness to surpass our past achievements, and to reach for new goals, then it can be productive, however when our competitiveness leads to the need to win at all costs and to crush others as we step over then, then is becomes a negative trait.
Dominance (To have power and influence over others.)
In a world were we accept that all people should be free to conduct their own lives as they wish as long as they do so without breaching the rights of others, is the desire and drive to have power over other people truly a good thing. Can we truly have a society of equals where some lord power and influence over others and use that power and influence to keep those that they see as beneath them from rising? Is it more manly to wield power over someone, or to lift them up to your own level?
Aggression (feelings of anger or antipathy resulting in hostile or violent behaviour; readiness to attack or confront.)
I'm not even sure that I have to make an argument as to why this is a bad idea to be a trait that should be promoted.
Anti-femininity (Against having qualities or attributes regarded as characteristic of women.)
Because men should never be seen to show gentleness, empathy, humility, and sensitivity.
Achievement (The act of carrying out a goal successfully)
This one I have little issue with, but I also don't see that it is an attribute that should be just encouraged in men. All people should be encouraged to achieve their goals.
Eschewal of the appearance of weakness
Similar to Stoicism, this tells men that they can never be weak, that they have to always hide their hurt and tough it out. It leads to similar results.
Adventure (Seeking out an unusual and exciting or daring experience.)
This is the other one that I have little issue with of the ten, we need to have goals and sometimes we need to seek out and extend ourselves by doing things that can be exhilarating. There is one issue with it, but that comes under the next heading.
Risk (Putting oneself in a situation involving exposure to danger.)
The issue with this one is when people are putting themselves into unacceptable risk because they are men and men having to take risks. Rick which is managed and mitigated is something that we need to be aware of and work with, but taking risks that are both an unregulated danger to ourselves and others should never be acceptable, and men should not be taught that taking such risks is what it takes to be a man.
Violence (Behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.)
Again, I don't even know why I need to say anything about why this should not be a trait that we should accept as being required to be a man, especially give the systemic issues with domestic violence and continual shootings in places such as the US.
So yeah, in my opinion, if you want to be a man, embrace competition with yourself to achieve your goals and experience adventure while doing that, and feel free to show your emotions and feelings. Don't feel you have to step on others and grasp power over them, but instead show others compassion and feel empathy for them. In the end you'll be a better man for it, and society will be better for it too.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12899177)
Miranda Devine, who at other times has denied that there is any difference between gender and biological sex writes:
"This is the noble side of masculinity that we once would perpetuate in folklore and stories passed down from father to son about what it means to be a real man." Presumably they all said "Son, in order to be a real man, be over sixteen and have a penis and testicles". Later she says: "The male attributes it fingered as most worrisome were: stoicism, competitiveness, dominance, aggression, anti-femininity, achievement, “eschewal of the appearance of weakness,” adventure, risk and violence. Gimme a break! Without any of that, all you’re left with is a soy boy with whom no self-respecting woman would want to mate." So even Miranda Devine identifies another gender: "soy boy". If I am not stoic, nor competitive, not dominant, not aggressive, not anti-femininity, a low-achiever, non-adventurous and non violent and don't eschew the appearance of weakness then I am not a man, I am a "soy-boy". |
Stoicism (The endurance of pain or hardship without the display of feelings and without complaint.)
Is this really a good thing? We have been teaching men that the display of feelings and emotion is weak and that men should just tough it up and not complain. Modern medicine seems to disagree with this philosophy showing that this repression of emotions can lead to mental disorders, explosive outbursts and PTSD. So should men really be excessively stoic?
Competitiveness (Possession of a strong desire to be more successful than others.)
While some competition is certainly a good thing, as it makes us strive to be better, both with men and women, the question here is should we set our goals and competitiveness against what others can do, or against what we have done previously. If we use competitiveness to surpass our past achievements, and to reach for new goals, then it can be productive, however when our competitiveness leads to the need to win at all costs and to crush others as we step over then, then is becomes a negative trait.
Dominance (To have power and influence over others.)
In a world were we accept that all people should be free to conduct their own lives as they wish as long as they do so without breaching the rights of others, is the desire and drive to have power over other people truly a good thing. Can we truly have a society of equals where some lord power and influence over others and use that power and influence to keep those that they see as beneath them from rising? Is it more manly to wield power over someone, or to lift them up to your own level?
Aggression (feelings of anger or antipathy resulting in hostile or violent behaviour; readiness to attack or confront.)
I'm not even sure that I have to make an argument as to why this is a bad idea to be a trait that should be promoted.
Anti-femininity (Against having qualities or attributes regarded as characteristic of women.)
Because men should never be seen to show gentleness, empathy, humility, and sensitivity.
Achievement (The act of carrying out a goal successfully)
This one I have little issue with, but I also don't see that it is an attribute that should be just encouraged in men. All people should be encouraged to achieve their goals.
Eschewal of the appearance of weakness
Similar to Stoicism, this tells men that they can never be weak, that they have to always hide their hurt and tough it out. It leads to similar results.
Adventure (Seeking out an unusual and exciting or daring experience.)
This is the other one that I have little issue with of the ten, we need to have goals and sometimes we need to seek out and extend ourselves by doing things that can be exhilarating. There is one issue with it, but that comes under the next heading.
Risk (Putting oneself in a situation involving exposure to danger.)
The issue with this one is when people are putting themselves into unacceptable risk because they are men and men having to take risks. Rick which is managed and mitigated is something that we need to be aware of and work with, but taking risks that are both an unregulated danger to ourselves and others should never be acceptable, and men should not be taught that taking such risks is what it takes to be a man.
Violence (Behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.)
Again, I don't even know why I need to say anything about why this should not be a trait that we should accept as being required to be a man, especially give the systemic issues with domestic violence and continual shootings in places such as the US.
So yeah, in my opinion, if you want to be a man, embrace competition with yourself to achieve your goals and experience adventure while doing that, and feel free to show your emotions and feelings. Don't feel you have to step on others and grasp power over them, but instead show others compassion and feel empathy for them. In the end you'll be a better man for it, and society will be better for it too.
via International Skeptics Forum https://ift.tt/2qz8jtT
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire