I found this video from the Manosphere commenter “Love, Ashley.”
Ashley’s insightful commentary:
I think men and women could potentially get along so much better if men knew how to communicate their feelings. If they did, I could have avoided so much stress and drama in the relationship and dating scenes. I am a firm believer in the idea of when there is a problem that comes up, communicate it with the person it concerns. Let it out, talk it out, get past it. But since men are taught to “be a man” and not show or express their emotions, there is so much they bottle up in fear of looking weak. When that happens, I sense it and it just pisses me off and makes me all kinds of uncomfortable. Now, there are men I have met who are more open and straightforward and have been able to express their emotions and me and those men get along so much better.
One of the commenters links to Jackson Katz, who claims to be an “anti-violence” expert, and his video called “Tough Guise.”
Further, the first video draws heavily on a book called Guyland, in which Michael Kimmel singles out white, heterosexual men and their degenerate culture for holding men back from gender equality. The problem with these authors and approaches is it does not understand what exactly is going on in society nor does it proscribe any appropriate or justified remedies.
First, people who like and believe these videos can’t conceptualize of people with healthy, solid personal identities. They are playing a frame control game that is aimed at eroding stronger—but still weak—personal identities of others. Kimmel and Katz don’t believe in strength and personal calm. Since they start with themselves, they assume that everybody else must have the same personal deficiencies as them.
The videos observe the wasteland of the modern boy growing into a man. They note explosions of violence, unstable identities, and inability to connect with other men. That sounds like a serious personality disorder manifested at a social level, which is known as social narcissism.
Still, it sounds like these boys subject themselves to recurrent, unhealthy patterns of thoughts. That is the definition of personality disorders. For the boys presented, they never mention anything about personality disorders. Isn’t it funny that people who bloviate so much about “harmful thought patterns” don’t understand that that is the definition of personality disorders. Therefore, there is no racist personality disorder, misogynistic personality disorder, or homophobic personality disorder. Anti-social, passive-aggressive, histrionic are all personality disorders.
It is disgusting that the video talks so much about “hyper-masculinity.” In the modern era with a clutch of boys who talk very nervously about their self-identity. What an example of hyper-masculinity!
One problem presented here is that as a society devolves it needs enemies of the thinly-veiled decline. The Duck Dynasty star said something something bad about practicing homosexuals and was skewered immediately because he represented an incredibly easy and threatening target: a family man from tradition with a solid personal identity. All three of those concepts is incredibly threatening to mainstream identities, as independence, fleeing the past and weak personal identities based on social approval are in vogue today.
Note the implicit assumption of female superiority in emotional and relational realms presented. Women start from themselves and part of collective female identity is that they have superior relational skills with friends, family and romantic partners. Society knows this isn’t true because the constellation of reality TV shows, etc. all know that women are worse at relationships than men.
Still, this stubbornly persistent belief bleeds over into discussions of masculinity. Women pretend that men don’t communicate with one another or if they do, it isn’t in an honest or effective way. We see the ridiculous multiplicity of crossed wires on the Left, as they dispute the fact that women speak more than men: it is either equal or men talk more. But, men don’t talk about what they truly want to talk about, just engaging in conversation to prop up their identity or maintain appearances. See the projection here?
This is also a derivation of the concept that “all men are beasts.” This concept exists in most cultures and—apparently—is a psychological construct that helps women explain male behavior they don’t understand, especially violent or abusive behavior males engage in. It shows the biological roots of female rationalization, as women have a incredibly tough time dealing with female homicide, child abuse, or any other behavior that is seen as originating from men. To be fair, men have unfairly categorized women, as a class, as dumber than men. That isn’t true from an IQ standpoint and much more reasonable observation is that women suffer, collectively, from a supreme drought of wisdom.
The other looming issue presented here is what happens when men express themselves. MRA’s have long realized what happens when men talk candidly and frankly about what men are feeling. Take Michael Kimmel. In his book Guyland, he worked intimately with many men, only to treat them—at best—as lab rats of an inferior breed. At his worse, he shows off his true intentions—to paint white men as morally repugnant, psychologically ill, and potentially homicidal and rapey maniacs.
What these sorts of people don’t realize is they are the reason men have so many issues. When feminists and women constantly label men as creepy, rapey, etc. all they do is place a damper on more honest exchanges between the sexes. Sure, the idea of a perfectly honest social dialogue between men and women is absurd on it’s face, but we could be more honest. Feminism has been complicit in so many things, but one striking is sex and relationships with women—with men as the speakers. Men can’t just say that men get fucked in divorce court, but Chris Rock can make jokes about women cleaning men’s financial clock in divorce court.
Personally, I see feminists as latter-day torch bearers of old, puritanical ideas about sex and relationships. They really don’t want sex to be talked about—but most especially by men. It isn’t any surprise that early second-wave feminists thoroughly trashed gay men and treated them like dirt. Of course, they had to educate gay men about misogyny because women are men’s moral superiors while they kick dirt in gay men’s faces and call them worthless faggots. Seriously check out some of Gloria Steinem’s early work in the seventies. That bitch hates gay men. But, now she hearts the gay marriage.
Back on point, these sorts of people who are apparently dying for a conversation about changing masculinity are part and parcel of the problem. First, they don’t realize how much of American masculinity is based on female approval. Second, they don’t understand that replacing the wider family unit with government bureaucrats and media is insanely damaging to the psyche of a child. Teachers, TV and social workers can’t unconditionally love a child.
Further, by the time kids enter the school system, personality disorders are already in force. If we expand the system—like Sweden—and start the governmental intervention as early as we can after the one year of parental leave, those children all present similar problems later on in life: the inability to handle change, a strong need for public approval and a highly deficient emotional life.
I feel they think that if men will just open up and express themselves, that will solve so many problems. Trust me—from first hand experience—revealing what lies beneath is often an incredibly dumb and short-sighted idea. Personality disorders exist to allow a person to live in society as best they can.
Finally, it is a stereotypically naive left-wing idea that if we all embrace all the egalitarian diversity tolerance then all the plus-good stuff happens. It reeks of an extremely naive view of the world that if we are all the same and appreciate each other not for substance by for superficialities, then we can finally rid the world of the wants, needs and frictions that necessarily inhere as existing as a human.
It should not have to be said, but: masculinity has never been a problem, but a solution to the social ills that plague so many societies.