American Psychological Association declares war on ''traditional masculinity''

[Basil II the B.S]

So, remember when liberals said there's no such thing as war on men?

They lied.

https://www.apa.org/monitor/2019/01/ce-corner.aspx

TL, dr:

The following are now bad:
- competitiveness (guess which ideological school of thought hates it?)
- risk taking
- stoicism
- aggression
- manliness (duh)

Their solution: gender policing to achieve flexibility of gender norms.

Courtesy of quality journals such as ''Journal of Black Psychology''.

Given that male aggression is driven by testosterone, just like risk taking is, while competitiveness is driven by desire for status as it's the primary factor by which women choose their reproductive partners, are we sure that gender policing such as making pre-teen males talk about their feelings will work?

Have liberals gone too far (yet)?

[Pontifex Maximus]

Ironically being a homo is considered to be completely normal, as is being transgender, but if you're a male that composes 97% of the average male population, you're suffering from a disorder.

Press x for doubt. Sadly since the APA chose to go woke, they no longer have any credibility.

[isa0005]

Having actually read the article, its pretty clear that you've done little more then cherry picked from a single paragraph. This has nothing to do with 'liberals'/ 'leftists' or their agenda for that matter as well. The APA has, over the last century primarily driven by 'conservative' values. All that's changed is that they have a better understanding of the human brain and our psychology and people have realised that its not okay to be arse hole.

The article in question is talking about rooting out certain 'toxic' and/or unhealthy behaviours and stiff-upper lip attitudes which are clearly detrimental to ones mental health and are some of the leading causes behind depression and skyrocketing rates of male suicide . It talks about instilling positive values and behaviours in boys and young men such as self-respect, respect for others (especially women) and self-care while placing value on emotional intelligence and understanding as well as racial and sexual equality. That doesn't sound to bad to me honestly.

You're treating 'men' as though we are little more then animals driven by base instincts and rushes of adrenaline and testosterone. You're also treating women as though they were driven by materialism, this makes me wonder if perhaps you've ever actually met a women before... I like to think that as creatures capable of considerable levels of cognition (atleast most us anyhow) that humans are capable of a little more.

Nice try. Better luck next time.

[Pontifex Maximus]

You're treating 'men' as though we are little more then animals driven by base instincts and rushes of adrenaline and testosterone. You're also treating women as though they were driven by materialism, this makes me wonder if perhaps you've ever actually met a women before... I like to think that as creatures capable of ...

The APA? Or those opposing it? This is the underlying problem with the leftist agenda, it often claims to be the opposite of that which it is for political expediency. For example: all conservatives are racist, but where race matters the most is in leftist politics. Don't believe me? Just pay even passing attention to the presidential maneuverings of democratic candidates.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

To hell with rapists, sexual molesters and bullies, who tarn themself as "traditional masculin".

You can easily see, thats something badly wrong with "traditional masculinity", if such a simple advertising video causes such a huge far right storm.

[Pontifex Maximus]

This is either a troll post or something significantly laughable, since gillette will get woke and go broke as well. I've got a gillette razor I really like but since my essence is, according to them, corrosive to our culture, they can go themselves.

Since you seem to think that "racists, rapists, and sexual monsters" are equivalent to "traditional masculism" your argument obviously has no weight to it. But if it did, why are only 20% of college women raped? (which is of course an over exaggeration, but widely accepted by the left.

If I was so easily rendered in my opinions to be incorrect, it would induce psychical illness to be so thoroughly disproven.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

There is obviously a problem with "traditional masculinity", if such a law is still needed to declare upskirting a unacceptable, criminal behaviour:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ison-term.html

[Pontifex Maximus]

So in your world, men who try to take pictures up women's skirts represent a majority of men, and a dangerous threat as such, to women who prefer they don't have up sirt pictures taken?

Are we in the twilight zone?

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

If upskirting and other forms of sexual assaults against women are not at least tolerated as minor unimportant things by those "traditional masculinity" zealots, then why was such a behaviour honoured with the victory in the presidential election of 2016?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald...Hollywood_tape

[Vanoi]

Pretty obvious that Basil nor Ponti read the article at all. It's not about war on masculinity

This is simply the APA doing the very same thing they did in 2007: https://www.apa.org/practice/guideli...and-women.aspx

This is no different when they released Guidelines for Psychological Practice with Girls and Women. They did the same thing. They addressed problems girls and women faced along with the bhavior of girls and women that were bad for their mental health.

Isn't anyone remotely curious on why 90 percent of homicides are committed by men and yet they also represent the vast majority of victims of homicides as well?

Or how men are over 3 times more likely than women to commit suicide? More likely than girls to punished in school or diagnosed with ADHD?

Similar questions were brought up about women and their behavior and what harm it can sometimes bring in APA's 2007 article.

Basil is injecting petty alt-right politics into a serious discussion about a series of problems that face men. If traditional roles of masculinity have a role in these problems, it needs to be addressed and then we need to find to either drop the bad behavior a find a better way to deal with it that doesn't harm your mental health.

[Basil II the B.S]

Having actually read the article, its pretty clear that you've done little more then cherry picked from a single paragraph. This has nothing to do with 'liberals'/ 'leftists' or their agenda for that matter as well. The APA has, over the last century primarily driven by 'conservative' values. All that's changed is that they have a better understanding of the human brain and our psychology and people have realised that its not okay to be arse hole.

The article in question is talking about rooting out certain 'toxic' and/or unhealthy behaviours and stiff-upper lip attitudes which are clearly detrimental to ones mental health and are some of the leading causes behind depression and skyrocketing rates of male suicide . It talks about instilling positive values and behaviours in boys and young men such as self-respect, respect for others (especially women) and self-care while placing value on emotional intelligence and understanding as well as racial and sexual equality. That doesn't sound to bad to me honestly.

Who considers competitiveness toxic? Marxist. End of the story. Noone else.

You're treating 'men' as though we are little more then animals driven by base instincts and rushes of adrenaline and testosterone. You're also treating women as though they were driven by materialism, this makes me wonder if perhaps you've ever actually met a women before... I like to think that as creatures capable of considerable levels of cognition (atleast most us anyhow) that humans are capable of a little more.

That's a liberal lie. The overwhelming majority of women pick their partner based on status, because of evolutionary reason: the kid is weak, hence needs a good provider.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...t-life-partner

As for testosterone, it's the primary reason men succeed in suicide a lot more (while attempting at roughly the same rate as women) and end up in prison a lot more; because they are more violent. That's science.

Pretty obvious that Basil nor Ponti read the article at all. It's not about war on masculinity

This is simply the APA doing the very same thing they did in 2007: https://www.apa.org/practice/guideli...and-women.aspx

This is no different when they released Guidelines for Psychological Practice with Girls and Women. They did the same thing. They addressed problems girls and women faced along with the bhavior of girls and women that were bad for their mental health.

Isn't anyone remotely curious on why 90 percent of homicides are committed by men and yet they also represent the vast majority of victims of homicides as well?

Or how men are over 3 times more likely than women to commit suicide? More likely than girls to punished in school or diagnosed with ADHD?

Similar questions were brought up about women and their behavior and what harm it can sometimes bring in APA's 2007 article.

Basil is injecting petty alt-right politics into a serious discussion about a series of problems that face men. If traditional roles of masculinity have a role in these problems, it needs to be addressed and then we need to find to either drop the bad behavior a find a better way to deal with it that doesn't harm your mental health.

Obviously Vanoi hasn't read any article whatsoever, since the guidelines for girls are full of encouragement and positivity while the ones about men decry typical mainly traits that developed through evolution.

To hell with rapists, sexual molesters and bullies, who tarn themself as "traditional masculin".

You can easily see, thats something badly wrong with "traditional masculinity", if such a simple advertising video causes such a huge far right storm.

I love how liberals now demand the right to criminalize all men, especially all white men, like in that video, but then get mad if you call them out on their hate based agenda.

Gilette is losing big shares of sales, down from 80 to 50%. Now they chose to pander to the 8% of political extremists joining their war against men.

Safe to say, plenty of men will never buy their products again. Gilette will go bankrupt and the markets will solve the problem. Good riddance to the human garbage who made that ad.

[Prodromos]

*sets down Bellini*
"Know what the working class really need, Archibald? Less masculinity."

[The spartan]

Wait, is it even possible to criticize a specific part of traditional masculinity, or do you have to criticize the whole thing all at once?

[Basil II the B.S]

You can criticize whatevere you wish and I can excoriate your critics at will.

[The spartan]

But the idea is that people can't disapprove of the bad aspects of traditional masculinity, right? If they some part of it is bad, then it is all bad, right?

[Basil II the B.S]

If you can make a compelling argument, you can criticize anything. The APA one is garbage. Risk taking is the driver of human innovation since the beginning of times. Competition among men is driven by women choice which generates hierarchies. Both criticisms are based on the premise that we must achieve equality of outcome between men and women, which is the current liberal fetish and has a record of inexorable failures due to clashing with basic evolutionary behaviours. It's not just that it doesn't work: it requires are repression of liberties, it makes both men and women unhappy (see the Paradox of declining female happiness), it produces mentally unstable individuals (see the 25% of millennials who have PTSD because Trump won) and it's based on unscientific premises. It's just evil.

[Diamat]

"traditional masculinity" zealots

You mean the majority of male Muslims, right? I'm glad we are on the same page.

[Prodromos]

But the idea is that people can't disapprove of the bad aspects of traditional masculinity, right? If they some part of it is bad, then it is all bad, right?

The masculine aspects in question are stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression, but these traits can be used to further virtuous as well as vicious aims; they are not intrinsically bad in themselves, and in fact are vital to a healthy and prosperous community.

Men and women are different, in innumerable ways. Each gender is inclined toward a particular set of traits, which can be used for either virtuous or vicious purposes. Men can use their aggression and leadership to be either protectors or abusers, while women may use their keen emotional awareness to be soothing healers or noxious manipulators, but neither set of traditional masculine or feminine traits is inherently "toxic."

It's problematic when these traits are exclusively associated with their abusive manifestations and condemned wholesale, since in reality the primary manifestations of traditional masculinity and femininity have always been virtuous, especially at the familial level. If anything, the problem today is not too much traditional masculinity, but too little of it.

The problem typically starts when boys grow up without decent masculine role models in their lives, and consequently are ignorant of what good masculinity looks like. So, being instinctively inclined to embrace some form of masculinity, they go down the easiest path of behavior, which for men revolves around mistreating other people. Virtuous forms of masculinity on the other hand require self-conquest and a strong moral compass, which often don't come naturally to people not raised on these values. As Plato once said, noble things are difficult.

Men are inclined to be masculine. The question is only what form of masculinity they will take. The types of men who adopt the more abusive forms of masculinity, are often those who weren't raised on any form of masculinity. So discouraging masculinity with the aim of combating abusive masculinity is likely to be counterproductive. "Drive nature out and she always returns", untamed and worse than before.

The cure to abusive masculinity isn't to eliminate masculinity; it is to cultivate good (i.e., virtuous, traditional, strong) masculinity, which includes stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression, but channeled toward virtuous and productive purposes.

[alhoon]

If upskirting and other forms of sexual assaults against women are not at least tolerated as minor unimportant things by those "traditional masculinity" zealots, then why was such a behaviour honoured with the victory in the presidential election of 2016?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald...Hollywood_tape

For many voters there are much more important issues than this and I don't blame them. Drugs, unemployment (not in USA, that's minor), crime, wars, illegal immigration, education, healthcare, trade etc are in my opinion indeed more important than the acts of a creepy old man. There is a larger picture and for good or for ill, upskirting is not a big issue for most of us, men and women. (A presidential candidate promoting sexual assault is a bigger issue BTW).

Also, honestly, traditional masculinity is about being a man, not being a perv and a creep. Macho men are not supposed to peek under skirts; that's behavior associated with adolescent boys.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Do you read, what APA declares as toxic behavior? Sexual Misconduct, Violence, Bullying. What does the Gilette Ad critizise? Only the former.

The reaction of the selfproclaimed defenders of human rights of "traditional man"?

via Imgflip Meme Generator

So i can't take those "arguments" of defending "traditional masculinity" seriously.

In fact this whole thread is raging about a nonissue. There is no war against poor traditional men.