How can I make this point? Need advice on the language.

[AG31]

@AG31

It's good that the range of identities has expanded to including things like 'gay, 'asexual', 'non-binary' By the time a boy has reached 'straight sexual male' they are probably going to be asking a few basic questions - 'How do girls see me? What kind of girls do I like? How can I make myself more attractive to (the kinds of) girls (I like)? What kinds of relationships do I want to have and when?' - This is also all going on at the same time as they are starting to make decisions about careers and possibly widening their hobbies and social life from the things they got up to as kids. The answer to those questions are probably going to make up their answer to what 'masculinity' means to them.

There's a whole range of places they can get answers from - their immediate family and friends, school, fictional media, news media and so on (and indeed these days YouTube which is a law unto itself). It's also not really clear that it's anyone's job in particular to sort people out - in many ways I'd prefer that schools stick to the alphabet, sum and a certain amount of the birds and bees rather than social engineering of any ideology.

Still, the answers to what to expect in romantic life is constantly changing -traditionally it meant a swift monogamous marriage. For those returning from World War 2, they at least could rely on their service record as a basis for any 'masculinity'. By the 1960s, you started to have the permissive society and masculinity was defined (at least in the extreme hippy circles) as free-love, experimentation and open-mindedness and arguably refusing the Vietnam draft was as masculine as accepting it. I don't think the punks of the late 1970s were ever particularly good at attracting women en-mass although there were some female punks, but their brand of anarchy was, at least, very male. By the 1980s thing were simple - money and a filofax brought you cocaine and women.

During all these periods, not many people were actually living on Haight-Ashbury or had a Wall Street Office, but for better or worse there was a zeitgeist. By the time I was of dating age in the 1990s, we were in the middle of the Lad and Laddette culture, at least in the UK. Go out and get drunk every night in your twenties, the time said, and something will happen, even if neither you or her particularly remember what it was. Then settle down once you hit your thirties.

This seems like pretty low bar socially, but it seems like the new generation isn't even hitting that. I'm not really sure what the dominant social movement image for the 2020s if it's not 'incels' The problem with saying that there are a million identites go and figure your out, is that it seems like a lot of guys aren't managing to do that. At least from what I read on-line, which is probably overblown to a certain degree.

(Sorry, life interrupting, so will post this now...)

Making the case for sexuality being just one of many aspects of one's identity does not mean it can't/shouldn't be explored by individuals and their mentors. So I'm not really saying "go figure it out," although it may have sounded that way. I'm saying it's just one of many things you have to go figure out. It doesn't define you.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Thanks, most folks think I'm full of BS. And, at least at times, don't disagree with them.

@MillieDynamite,
My dear colleague, I do like the way you have of cutting through the blurb and hitting the nail square on.
I wonder, if, as an ex-patriot now residing in the U.S. I could write a book about everything that's wrong here and make a squillion off it?
Nahhhh... pipe dream!

Deeply respectful, always,
D.

 

[TheRedChamber]

Making the case for sexuality being just one of many aspects of one's identity does not mean it can't/shouldn't be explored by individuals and their mentors. So I'm not really saying "go figure it out," although it may have sounded that way. I'm saying it's just one of many things you have to go figure out. It doesn't define you.

I think the issue I have is that modern tendancy to worry about including everyone and, in so doing, make things so vague that it benefits no one.

Imagine going to the school's career service and being told 'your job doesn't define you' True maybe, but not as helpful as showing the teenage what a proper CV looks like.

 

[AG31]

I think the issue I have is that modern tendancy to worry about including everyone and, in so doing, make things so vague that it benefits no one.

Imagine going to the school's career service and being told 'your job doesn't define you' True maybe, but not as helpful as showing the teenage what a proper CV looks like.

Absolutely. Explore your groups whenever it's appropriate. Not at all advocating that people at a job fair be told "your job doesn't define you." They shouldn't be told it does define them. But the topic of conversation should be available jobs.

 

[MillieDynamite]

However, some professions can lead people to draw conclusions about you that may not be accurate: oil field workers, police, doctors, and many others. Probably including writers!

Absolutely. Explore your groups whenever it's appropriate. Not at all advocating that people at a job fair be told "your job doesn't define you." They shouldn't be told it does define them. But the topic of conversation should be available jobs.

 

[TheWorldBuilder]

My father worked on North Sea gas rigs from 1973 to 1997. He's 5' 7", 10st 9lbs (149), will be 90 in a few months. Why not 6' 4", 19st? Because he was chief electrician.

 

[MrHereWriting]

Scott Galloway writes books and makes the rounds of cable TV talking about the plight of young men, citing statistics about how they've fallen behind in education and employment and self-worth.

I'm especially ambivalent about a couple of his points:

1 - Boys should aspire to be providers.

2 - We (society) should affirm the masculine sex drive to counteract the message that their sex drive is "toxic masculinity."

I'm ambivalent for obvious reasons. Point 1 can be the start of a slippery slope to "the man is the head of the househoud." Galloway tries to put the breaks on by saying, "and sometimes that means getting out of the way so your partner can bring in the money." Point 2 ignores the entitlement men have felt to use women as they will. Here, too, Galloway nods to the truth behind "toxic masculinity."

So I've articulated my response to Galloway to be this: "All people should aspire to care for others. And all human sexuality should be celebrated."

My problem, the point of this post, is that we can't celebrate "all" human sexuality. We can only celebrate it when it doesn't harm others. But caveats don't work with battle cries. Any suggestions on how I can phrase my response to Galloway, a way that's sound-bit snappy?

Edit: His latest book is the top seller on Amazon.

Let the AH know when you need help writing a blurb that tells Rachel Hollis, or any other women's only self-help book writer, that her book title should be People, Stop Apologizing: A shame-Free Plan for Embracing and Achieving your Goals instead of....

Girl, Stop Apologizing: A Shame-Free Plan for Embracing and Achieving Your Goals, by Rachel Hollis.​

"Hollis’s writing is beautifully blunt, and she humbly thanks her fans for her success. Her actionable ideas and captivating voice will encourage women to believe in themselves." - Publisher's Weekly (starred review)

“I believe we can change the world. But first, we’ve got to stop living in fear of being judged for who we are.”

Rachel Hollis has seen it too often: Women not living into their full potential. They feel a tugging on their hearts for something more, but they’re afraid of embarrassment, of falling short of perfection, of not being enough.

_________

If you were addressing Andrew Tate, I'd understand, but this battle seems forced.

 

[Nightaelf]

The emancipation of women is still not equal to that of men, we’re nowhere near finished. And then along comes someone complaining about how difficult men supposedly have it. It feels like someone standing at the top of the stairs whining that their view is being ruined, while everyone else is still trying to climb one step higher. And honestly, it would be good for men to experience what it’s like to not automatically be the most important one. That isn’t a punishment, it’s growth. People develop from that.

And instead of talking about celebrating all human sexuality, you can keep it simpler and more truthful. All people deserve to be seen and valued, as long as they don’t harm others.

 

[questquilya]

The emancipation of women is still not equal to that of men, we’re nowhere near finished. And then along comes someone complaining about how difficult men supposedly have it. It feels like someone standing at the top of the stairs whining that their view is being ruined, while everyone else is still trying to climb one step higher. And honestly, it would be good for men to experience what it’s like to not automatically be the most important one. That isn’t a punishment, it’s growth. People develop from that.

And instead of talking about celebrating all human sexuality, you can keep it simpler and more truthful. All people deserve to be seen and valued, as long as they don’t harm others.

This.

 

[MrHereWriting]

The emancipation of women is still not equal to that of men, we’re nowhere near finished. And then along comes someone complaining about how difficult men supposedly have it. It feels like someone standing at the top of the stairs whining that their view is being ruined, while everyone else is still trying to climb one step higher.

Not all men, but a certain group of men who are letting life pass them by.

Certain groups of people, men, women, whatever your belief is, need to be addressed directly because for some reason they don't understand how to find success.

The treatment for these groups isn't universal and just because one person addresses one group directly doesn't mean they're discounting the plight of others.

And honestly, it would be good for men to experience what it’s like to not automatically be the most important one. That isn’t a punishment, it’s growth. People develop from that.

No one should feel like they are worthless. The people he's specifically addressing already feel like they have no value. They are at rock bottom and they aren't growing. That's the problem. He's trying to reach the people that don't know how to grow.

And instead of talking about celebrating all human sexuality, you can keep it simpler and more truthful. All people deserve to be seen and valued, as long as they don’t harm others.

And yet you think not being valued (and for these men it's not being valued ever) is good for them.

People need to realize that there are groups of people out there that need to be addressed per group, not per all and picking on one person for trying to help one group isn't beneficial to anyone except your own ego.

This isn't Men vs Women, this is people helping people.

 

[TheRedChamber]

The emancipation of women is still not equal to that of men, we’re nowhere near finished. And then along comes someone complaining about how difficult men supposedly have it. It feels like someone standing at the top of the stairs whining that their view is being ruined, while everyone else is still trying to climb one step higher. And honestly, it would be good for men to experience what it’s like to not automatically be the most important one. That isn’t a punishment, it’s growth. People develop from that.

And instead of talking about celebrating all human sexuality, you can keep it simpler and more truthful. All people deserve to be seen and valued, as long as they don’t harm others.

So, you are saying men shouldn't talk about their feelings?

 

[Nightaelf]

So, you are saying men shouldn't talk about their feelings?

I’m responding to what Galloway writes, not saying that men shouldn’t talk about their feelings. Men absolutely should. My point is that women’s emancipation is still far from equal, so it feels strange when his framing suggests that men are the primary ones suffering. It isn’t about choosing men or women. It’s about recognising that inequality still exists, and that we need more space for everyone, not just those who already had it.”

 

[Nightaelf]

They are at rock bottom and they aren't growing.

I’ve been at rock bottom myself. I’ve had to fight my way back up, and right now I’m certainly not strong or healthy either. But I don’t use that as an excuse to make others responsible for my pain. It’s hard, absolutely, but hard isn’t the same as being an inevitable victim.”

 

[MrHereWriting]

I’ve been at rock bottom myself. I’ve had to fight my way back up, and right now I’m certainly not strong or healthy either. But I don’t use that as an excuse to make others responsible for my pain. It’s hard, absolutely, but hard isn’t the same as being an inevitable victim.”

These are some of things the writer is helping others to understand, per his amazon page and blurb.

• Get out of the house. Action absorbs anxiety.
• Take risks and be willing to feel like an imposter. Don’t let rejection stop you.
• Be kind. That’s the secret to success in relationships.
• Find what you’re good at; follow your talent.
• Acknowledge your blessings—and create opportunities for others. Be of surplus value.
• Being a good dad means being good to the mother of your children.
• Life isn’t about what happens to you—it’s about how you respond to it.

He's not telling people to blame others. He's telling them to live.

Edit: This isn't about your experience or you, it's about those who have given up.

 

[Nightaelf]

Edit: This isn't about your experience or you, it's about those who have given up.

I know what the blurb says. Inspirational lines are easy to agree with, and none of them are harmful. But quoting his Amazon page doesn’t change the fact that his framing often centers men as uniquely struggling, while women still face structural inequality. That imbalance is the point I’m talking about. I’m not arguing against living, or taking risks, or being kind. I’m saying his message lands oddly in a world where not everyone starts from the same position on the ladder.

And your edit is quite misplaced. You don’t know me, yet you make that kind of assumption. It is also ironic, because the very group you claim to be talking about includes people like me. I’ve been at a point where I didn’t want to go on with life, and I chose real therapy over postcard wisdom. So dismissing experiences doesn’t strengthen your point, it only narrows it.

 

[MrHereWriting]

I know what the blurb says. Inspirational lines are easy to agree with, and none of them are harmful. But quoting his Amazon page doesn’t change the fact that his framing often centers men as uniquely struggling, while women still face structural inequality. That imbalance is the point I’m talking about. I’m not arguing against living, or taking risks, or being kind. I’m saying his message lands oddly in a world where not everyone starts from the same position on the ladder.

You're making this about men against women.

He's addressing who are suffering from this and somewhere out there, there are people who address only women who suffer from this as well.

And your edit is quite misplaced.

I read your words. My edit is perfectly placed. You talked about your experiences instead of the experiences of the people the book is addressing.

You say you grew from your experiences, the people this book is addressing haven't. Which catalyst for growth are accepted and which aren't?

You don’t know me, yet you make that kind of assumption. It is also ironic, because the very group you claim to be talking about includes people like me. I’ve been at a point where I didn’t want to go on with life, and I chose real therapy over postcard wisdom. So dismissing experiences doesn’t strengthen your point, it only narrows it.

Speaking of Irony, the author is relating his experiences and aren't his worth as much as yours? Otherwise, your experience is nothing more than "postcard wisdom."

I wish you more personal growth as I leave what will become nothing more than repetition between us..

 

[TheRedChamber]

his framing often centers men as uniquely struggling

You objected earlier to having a female-centered title rewritten to remove gender, so we are going in circles.

As I understand it, his claim is that men (or boys maybe) are more likely to face the specific issues he's trying to address. And men are famously not great at getting therapy or buying therapy books, so making it absolutely clear this is written specifically for them is probably a good idea. That doesn't necessarily mean that some women (girls) aren't in a similar position.

If he's claiming that this is a more serious problem for the US than say abortion rights or immigration, then sure, give him hell. I suspect he's just claiming that this is the particular problem he wants to address.

(Once again, I dont know much about him and havent read his work)

 

[Statius]

No response will be necessary as I will not return to this thread, but.
I have not read this person but everything quoted here sounds very much like coded incel speech to me. It's dangerous, and to dismiss her thoughts and feelings on it is not justified. Coded or not, incel speak should be, and needs to be dismissed out of hand, period. They blame women, they blame women's rights. They think all women should just submit, not just to a man, but all men. It's dangerous. In the US we are not treating or respecting women as people, let alone equals or partners. Anyone can claim that the statements made here are rational, the argument is rational, but incel speak is not rational, it is dangerous and it is taking away the rights of half the population, and would reduce women to mere chattel, as it used to be. It must be spoken against, dismissed, rejected.

 

[Nightaelf]

You're making this about men against women.

He's addressing who are suffering from this and somewhere out there, there are people who address only women who suffer from this as well.



I read your words. My edit is perfectly placed. You talked about your experiences instead of the experiences of the people the book is addressing.

You say you grew from your experiences, the people this book is addressing haven't. Which catalyst for growth are accepted and which aren't?



Speaking of Irony, the author is relating his experiences and aren't his worth as much as yours? Otherwise, your experience is nothing more than "postcard wisdom."

I wish you more personal growth as I leave what will become nothing more than repetition between us..

I’m not dismissing the author’s experiences. They matter, just like anyone’s do. But Scott Galloway is a professor of marketing who uses his personal experiences as material for inspirational speaking and motivation, and as far as I can tell he doesn’t hold any degree in psychology. His framing is largely commercial and targeted at young men, even though he brings socially loaded topics into the discussion. That’s why I think it’s important to place his message in the right context.

What I reacted to was the framing, not the idea that young men suffer or that they shouldn’t seek help. You keep insisting I’m turning this into men versus women, but pointing out structural inequality is not the same as starting a gender war.

I shared my experience because your edit suggested that I didn’t belong to the group the book addresses. The only thing I’m not, in this context, is a young man. My response wasn’t meant to centre myself, it was meant to correct that assumption.

Therapy wasn’t postcard wisdom that left me to figure out the rest on my own. It was grounded, intensive, and difficult work, and the confrontation with myself was the hardest part. But that’s where real growth happens and it kept me alive.

That doesn’t invalidate the author’s journey, and it doesn’t invalidate mine. Both can exist without competing for legitimacy.

I don’t mind disagreeing with you, but if you want to step away from the conversation, that’s fine.

 

[MrHereWriting]

No response will be necessary as I will not return to this thread, but.
I have not read this person but everything quoted here sounds very much like coded incel speech to me. It's dangerous, and to dismiss her thoughts and feelings on it is not justified. Coded or not, incel speak should be, and needs to be dismissed out of hand, period. They blame women, they blame women's rights. They think all women should just submit, not just to a man, but all men. It's dangerous. In the US we are not treating or respecting women as people, let alone equals or partners. Anyone can claim that the statements made here are rational, the argument is rational, but incel speak is not rational, it is dangerous and it is taking away the rights of half the population, and would reduce women to mere chattel, as it used to be. It must be spoken against, dismissed, rejected.

You've created a straw man argument so you can address an issue that isn't even relevant to the discussion at hand.

On a side note, anything that pulls anyone out of incel culture is a good thing.

 

[TheRedChamber]

No response will be necessary as I will not return to this thread.

The absolute gall of expecting your reponse to be read but not replied to on a public forum...

I have not read this person but everything quoted here sounds very much like coded incel speech to me...

It would seem to be more the case that people are discussing how incels can stop being incels.

It's kind of funny how no-one has actually read this guy (me included) but we are all seeing what we are inclined to see.

By all means someone quote some actual sexism from him on the thread.

 

[cw5523729]

Don't mind me, I'm just here for the popcorn

 

[MillieDynamite]

It seems to be turning personal in here. As I stated, Scott Gallaway is a snake oil salesman, selling it's not your fault, to anyone who will buy what he is selling. He could just as easily be selling his brand to women, CEOs, or any other group willing to buy what he sells. He's found a market, he offers them comfort and the soothing balm of not being responsible for whatever ill has befallen them. Has anyone read him? Does he give them a way out of their predicament, or only prop up their collective egos?

 

[MillieDynamite]

Oh, actually, I know what he sells: traditional male-female roles. The man is the protector, the woman is the one who must be protected! "Me man, you woman, get the fuck back in the kitchen."

 

[TheRedChamber]

Has anyone read him? Does he give them a way out of their predicament, or only prop up their collective egos?

@MrHereWriting posted part of it already, but here is the full blurb from his website.

Boys and men are in crisis. Rarely has a cohort fallen further and faster than young men living in Western democracies. Boys are less likely to graduate from high school or college than girls. One in seven men reports having no friends, and men account for three of every four deaths of despair in America. Even worse, the lack of attention to these problems has created a void filled by voices espousing misogyny, the demonization of others, and a toxic vision of masculinity. But this is not just a male issue: women and children can’t flourish if men aren’t doing well. As we know from spasms of violence, there is nothing more dangerous than a lonely, broke young man.

NYU Stern Professor Scott Galloway has been sounding the alarm on this issue for years. In Notes on Being a Man, Professor Galloway explores what it means to be a man in modern America. He promotes the importance of healthy masculinity and mental strength. He shares his own story from boyhood to manhood. He explores his parent’s difficult divorce, working through his anger and depression issues, trying to make money, and raising two boys. He shares the sometimes funny, often painful, lessons he learned along the way.

Some of these lessons include:

• Being a good dad means being good to their mother.
• Action absorbs anxiety.
• Find what you’re good at—follow your talent.
• Get out of the house.
• Take risks and be willing to feel like an imposter. This is a key to professional success—and masculinity.
• Acknowledge your blessings—and create opportunities for others. Be of surplus value.
• Be kind. That’s the secret to success in relationships.

With unflinching honesty, Professor Galloway maps out an enriching, inspiring operator’s manual for being a man today.

Kitchens not mentioned so far, but who knows what the full text might hold. I'm vaguely thinking of taking one for the team and buying, reading and reporting back on the book. On the other hand, I'd hate to be sold snake oil.