4 points
*

This article and every other article they link to in this series is written by a woman. A series discussing manhood and masculinity. I said it the last time an article like this was posted and I’ll say it again. Women writing articles about masculinity should be viewed in much the same way as men writing articles about women. They have no perspective in what it means to be a man or what masculinity is or is not.

Edit: Adjusted wording per another reply.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

I agree with some of what you say but "abhorrent trend " is a bit much. If anything I think it’s more of and eye roll.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Yeah that’s probably fair. Perhaps a little overly reactive on my part.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

“Manhood” and masculinity are stupid ideologies.

permalink
report
reply
-3 points

They can be fun and provide a lot of guidance for people in a world which otherwise has very little. It’s important for people to be able to celebrate who they are.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-14 points

no stupider than feminism

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Untrue, feminism is based on a desire for equality, masculism is based on a desire for mAnLiNeSs. It’s ephemeral, ill-defined, and pointless.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Manhood or masculinity is perfectly fine so long as it’s a personal decision and you don’t judge others to whatever you’ve decided is the “standard”

If you want to wear plaid with an 18 inch beard and chop wood, awesome. Just don’t tell me thats the only standard for “a man”

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Great article. Insightful and over a longer time horizon than I expected

permalink
report
reply
5 points
*

Elites… teach us??? Hmm, no.

Unless they’re teaching us where not to stick the pitchforks.

permalink
report
reply
4 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Initially, the article brought up a lot of cool things about masculinity, which I didn’t know: notably about how society, sees a crisis of masculinity, at every social change.

However, the article did not wrap this up at all. It resorted to talking about essentially a religious convention, and Trump rally. Then referenced so-called “philosophers” and “scholars” akin to Joe Rogan. This isn’t a fair comparison, it’s literally asking a podcast host to solve a huge social issue.

Additionally for some reason referencing how white men don’t even belong in America because it’s native land; when that is a whole separate issue that we can talk about and needs to be addressed but distracts from the article title.

I would love to talk about this more, but this article really drags men’s mental health + belonging in the dirt and undermines anyone trying to legitimately help men belong in this world in a non-toxic and fulfilling way.

permalink
report
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 15K

    Posts

  • 441K

    Comments