Why Men Kill themselves

[SD45T-2]

I do feel that the current setup of our school systems is failing many boys. There are two pipelines, the school-to-prison and the school-to-college pipelines- those are the only two versions of masculinity that are being sold to our boys. Either you go to college and succeed as an Important Businessman or you gang up and commit Manly Criminal Acts (and often, especially for boys of color, this is expected of them and glorified in some ways). What of boys who could be satisfied and fulfilled in a blue-collar job? That used to be respectable, but now it's seen as many rungs below college careers. Or, even if they did go to school but found their joy in a traditionally female field such as teaching or nursing? Boys and men with those aspirations are often laughed at by their peers (notably, not usually by women- we love that shit).

Example: My little brother (turning 30 this year) is a welder. Personally, I think that's totally awesome, and a perfectly respectable job. He makes decent money and I love telling people my brother is a welder. He helps make John Deere/Hitachi tractors and farm equipment. But he's got a terrible sense of inferiority about it and is always "promising" us that he plans to go back to school for engineering. School was just never his gig- and IMO there should be separate tracks for folks who are just not academically inclined. There is no shame in having different talents.

He did have one terrible girlfriend who reinforced that hierarchy that he was "not living up to his potential" as a welder, but his wife now is not giving him those messages- she's proud of him in the job he's in. I worry a lot about him. Additionally, he holds himself to an impossible standard of self-reliance, and when the facade breaks and he loses his shit it's UGLY. And then he zips it back up and promises us he'll "do better." I try to tell him that it's okay if he needs to lean on us now and then, and maybe if he sought some support here and there he wouldn't feel like exploding.

 

[Lark]

I agree with that statement. Despite many people who don't espouse these values at least intellectually if nothing else, men in society, as a whole, are often valued based on the power and influence they wield. I guess it's probably always been that way. It's why a male's identity is often connected to their career.





I can speak to the one person I knew well who committed suicide. He was married with two kids and very successful in his career. He had recently moved into a big and fancy house and seemed to have a very happy life from the outside. He was a very good father. Then he lost his job. Unfortunately for a variety of reasons, he did not end up getting another one. First he lost his house. Then he lost his wife - who had always been somewhat materialistic. Then he lost his family. Then he ran into serious money problems. In the end, I guess he saw no way out. He died of carbon monoxide poisoning in his garage. It was probably a 10 year period between when he lost his job and when he committed suicide.

It is a strange case in one way because he is a guy who always had a lot going for him - smart, good looking, hard working, funny, a leader, and a reliable and trusted friend to many. He went to church every week. He is someone who always seemed to have his shit together. I believe he must have suffered from depression though he never told me that. I don't know if he told any of his friends. Circumstances no doubt played a part in fueling that depression. Nobody knew how much he was struggling and it took everyone by surprise. There is a part of me who will always blame his wife for not sticking with him and supporting him - helping him get out of the rut he put himself in - which I believe was very much self imposed. Of course, I will never know how hard she tried, what she did to try and help him and you never know all that is going on in someone's personal life. All I know is that they divorced within a couple years of him losing his job. She said she "couldn't live that way" - in a rented house, etc. She left when they lost the house. It "was all his fault" and she told him "you said we were going to be rich".

I'm sorry for the loss of your friend [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION], I'm not sure that I'd generalise from that one incidence, perhaps I'm an optimist because I'm also single.

Now, on the back of what you've just said I dont want to argue my own point to much, I think it could appear disrespectful but what I would say is that when the one child policy was introduced in China, decided by men, it was female children who were the victims of abortion, infanticide and abandonment, not males, thankfully I've heard that this may be changing now, the policy itself has been revised, but its actually changed the demography of China in unintended ways.

Though I certainly do think your points are valid, especially given that I live in just such a materialistic culture (Ireland has got that in spades now), for almost every good point there's a good counter point too.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Here's my problem with Toxic Masculinity theory. It's usually defined and written about as something perpetuated in men by the big bad patriarchy. So here we go again with the implication that all of the worst aspects of masculinity are perpetuated by men. So it's supposedly the men at the top perpetuating and encouraging this behavior in the rest of men.

It's almost borderline tinfoil hat stuff, when you think about it.

Why can't we look at toxic forms of masculine and feminine expression as something that is intrinsic in society in general and not some construct that has been forced on us by a patriarchal board of overlords, as though they got together and devised this as some evil plan to keep working class men and women down. I don't think it's quite that simple, and that's where feminists lose me. I think it's something that has been and is continually collectively perpetuated by the majority of both men and women as "social norms." Blaming patriarchy or matriarchy or some other sinister bogeyman is counterproductive.

 

[Lark]

What I know about the concept of toxic masculinity is that it is a feminist narrative. Here let me quote:

"Toxic masculinity is one of the ways in which Patriarchy is harmful to men. It refers to the socially-constructed attitudes that describe the masculine gender role as violent, unemotional, sexually aggressive, and so forth.

A well-known masculinity/men's rights movement that is not mostly anti-feminist has yet to appear. For a silencing tactic used to discredit patriarchy's harm to people who are not men, see Patriarchy hurts men too."

Toxic masculinity - Geek Feminism Wiki - Wikia

My point being, that I'm quite familiar with the concept and I don't like the term for several reasons, one of the reasons that is relevant to this thread is the use of 'toxic'.

For a moment, set aside your ideology and imagine a discussion among mostly women about an issue that affects women, then have some guy drop a masculinist article using toxic femininity in the article title.

If you've not read the novel Gate To Woman's Country by Sherri S Tepper I'd highly recommend it.

 

[Ivy]

Mike Rowe videos

Big fan of Mike Rowe! Saving those videos to watch later.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

I will read both the salon and daily mail articles after work.

 

[ceecee]

Or maybe it's because divorce is fucking hard and sad, and we're not raising boys to know what to do with feelings of sadness or to lean on others when things get hard.

Or how to deal with failure, period. There are so many people, who haven't experienced failure, either because they were shielded from it or told it was unacceptable. And when it happens, and it always does, everything collapses. Looking at divorce, I can say that for men, even when they 100% wanted out of their marriage and life became much better after, there is always some residue of failure. My husband had it and was resistant to getting help but we did it together in therapy. He's always said talking that helped create a better foundation for us as a couple.

 

[Ivy]

Here's my problem with Toxic Masculinity theory. It's usually defined and written about as something perpetuated in men by the big bad patriarchy. So here we go again with the implication that all of the worst aspects of masculinity is perpetuated by men. So it's supposedly the men at the top perpetuating and encouraging this behavior in the rest of men.

It's almost borderline tinfoil hat stuff, when you think about it.

Why can't we look at toxic forms of masculine and feminine expression as something that is intrinsic in society in general and not some construct that has been forced on us by a patriarchal board of overlords, as though they got together and devised this as some evil plan to keep working class men down. I don't think it's quite that simple, and that's where feminists lose me. I think it's something that has been and is continually collectively perpetuated by the majority of both men and women as "social norms." Blaming patriarchy or matriarchy or some other sinister bogeyman is counterproductive.

I don't think that's at all reflected in the article I posted, which indicts men and women, especially mothers and fathers, for perpetuating the notions that boys should not express their emotions. Seriously, I wish y'all would just read it instead of making up what you think it says because it uses the term "toxic masculinity" and you have a whole lot of knee-jerk reactions to that one term.

I also don't think your characterization of what feminists think patriarchy is is accurate, but again, I don't want to (further) shit up this thread by dragging it into what the fuck feminism is and isn't. Though a whole lot of accusations get leveled at feminism in threads of this nature and it's really fucking tiresome to let them go by, even knowing that it's pointless to engage.

 

[SpankyMcFly]

It really seems like you didn't read any of the article, and you're just focusing on that term to the exclusion of what the article ACTUALLY SAYS, which is almost identical to the article you rebutted mine with, with the exception of the terms used to describe/classify. So you're just complaining about style over substance, and I'm not here for that. IOW, I don't think I'm the one stuck on my own ideology.

You're moving the goal posts.

Again, the article did not discuss that males are born more emotional than females. It is impossible for it to be the same thing.

If you want to call my complaint one of style, sure, that's why I linked the definition. That term is more than just style, it's about a narrative from the feminist ideology. I think it's important for people to know where and who came up with that term and how it was then used in that article, so they can better assess the information therein.

 

[Lark]

^Well, that's bullshit. "Toxic masculinity" is IN NO WAY saying "guys, you're toxic." That is not what toxic masculinity is- it is the EXPECTATIONS we put on men, from birth, to be stoic, strong, unemotional, and superhuman. Which you would know if you had read beyond the title of the article I posted.

Patriarchy is bad for men too, I cant understand that anyone gets defensive when its pointed out they are supposedly a benefactor of structural injustice/oppression or privilege because any system of injustice/oppression is bad for "master" and "servant" alike, just not in the same ways but none the less bad.

Plus its generally structural in character and that's not something I would be able to personalise to my self as easily as some people on this forum or else where appear to be able to do, most of its unconscious, intergenerational and cultural in character, not "knowingly inculcated" (but insidious if it is).

That defensiveness I think is why there's even things like these language barriers, most people ought to be able to recognize that when discussion of toxic masculinity is not meant to be a simple matter of maligning the male, that's pointless, I'm sure some people do that and that it happens but its not what feminism or any anti-oppressive efforts to do with sex/gender is about.

These threads never get anywhere, I'm sad to see that they repeatedly come back and they're like a beacon for the sort of "balanced" individual who's got a chip on both shoulders.

 

[uumlau]

Seriously. I'm begging you ALL, as a member not as a mod, just fucking stop ruining this thread that had potential and that some of us are trying to have a grownup discussion in.

Ivy, while I understand your sentiment, ^^this is part of the problem. In a discussion where things are actually being discussed, you don't get to pick and choose what aspects of a topic are off limits. Maybe in a formal debate, but not in most threads. Telling people to "shut up" - however indirectly - is just as toxic if not more so than whatever topic you want to avoid.

From a cultural standpoint...

the poor classes have always had it shitty. the men in those classes enjoyed little more rights than their wives and daughters, and in some regards, they were even less advantaged and more disposable.

The women's rights' movements were largely beneficial, but what went wrong was that men kind of got left behind as progress happened. Now they're continually falling behind in both school and professional scenarios--it isn't really all that obvious yet, but give it another several decades. Now, as far as the powerful classes are concerned, women are still a minority in the halls of power, however they have made many inroads and we're gradually seeing more and more take their rightful places in those classes. However, with our schools in fact favoring females by design, we're going to see the scale tipping the other way rather than coming to a balance, as it should rightfully be.

So men might not be outright thinking, "ohhh feminism and gender politics have driven me to blow my brains out," but the conditions in our society may certainly be at least partly to blame for an increase in male suicide rates.

Am I blaming women? No. I'm just trying to recognize the trends in society that may explain the increase in male suicide rates.

Yeah, I don't think there's a cause-effect between women's rights movements and suicide, per se. The women's right movement has been active for a long time. The recent increase in suicide is localized in the last decade or so.

It doesn't even seem to be poor vs rich, because black and hispanic males aren't seeing the same increase in suicide rates: it's white, middle aged men. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...hite-middle-age-suicide-in-america-skyrockets

If I'm not mistaken, and I don't have the time to look this up right now but I've consistently heard it from reliable sources, men SUCCEED far more often, but women ATTEMPT far more often. An attempt is often a cry for help, so it makes sense that men who feel hopeless enough to consider suicide mostly don't want to ask for help, and don't consider failure an option. After all, it would just be one more thing to be incompetent at.

Yeah, I believe this is a large part of the male vs. female dynamic. But there is also a recent spike that isn't explained away. I think the main takeaway is that if a man decides to kill himself, it's probably going to happen. It's not a cry for help, just despairing of any help. This is a point I'll return to at the end of this post.

I do feel that the current setup of our school systems is failing many boys. There are two pipelines, the school-to-prison and the school-to-college pipelines- those are the only two versions of masculinity that are being sold to our boys. Either you go to college and succeed as an Important Businessman or you gang up and commit Manly Criminal Acts (and often, especially for boys of color, this is expected of them and glorified in some ways). What of boys who could be satisfied and fulfilled in a blue-collar job? That used to be respectable, but now it's seen as many rungs below college careers. Or, even if they did go to school but found their joy in a traditionally female field such as teaching or nursing? Boys and men with those aspirations are often laughed at by their peers (notably, not usually by women- we love that shit).

Example: My little brother (turning 30 this year) is a welder. Personally, I think that's totally awesome, and a perfectly respectable job. He makes decent money and I love telling people my brother is a welder. He helps make John Deere/Hitachi tractors and farm equipment. But he's got a terrible sense of inferiority about it and is always "promising" us that he plans to go back to school for engineering. School was just never his gig- and IMO there should be separate tracks for folks who are just not academically inclined. There is no shame in having different talents.

He did have one terrible girlfriend who reinforced that hierarchy that he was "not living up to his potential" as a welder, but his wife now is not giving him those messages- she's proud of him in the job he's in. I worry a lot about him. Additionally, he holds himself to an impossible standard of self-reliance, and when the facade breaks and he loses his shit it's UGLY. And then he zips it back up and promises us he'll "do better." I try to tell him that it's okay if he needs to lean on us now and then, and maybe if he sought some support here and there he wouldn't feel like exploding.

I agree that there definitely needs to be much more respect for trade schools. It isn't a failure to go that route. Heck, most IT jobs these days would easily fit into a trade school environment - you don't need a CS degree for them. CS is computer THEORY, not computer USE.

I will agree IN PART with your analysis that we are too limited in how we teach what success looks like. A lot of things that have been traditionally thought of as successful and fulfilling - such as blue collar jobs - aren't taught as being successful any more. But I think it's more than just blue collar jobs, but all sorts of valid expressions of masculinity that are negated by certain flavors of feminist activism. As Christina Hoff Summers puts it, we don't let boys BE BOYS. That means actually letting them run around and do risky things and playing in dirt and being rambunctious. And later on it means being responsible, where we make it clear that playing is fine, but you need to do something productive and not only be able to take care of yourself, but take care of other people.

Another good article about the root causes of this phenomenon.

Toxic masculinity is killing men: The roots of male trauma - Salon.com

I would regard this as thumb-sucking, condescending nonsense, lacking any understanding of masculinity.

Or maybe it's because divorce is fucking hard and sad, and we're not raising boys to know what to do with feelings of sadness or to lean on others when things get hard.

And this is more condescending nonsense.

Boys are wired to not lean on people as much as girls are. This is gut-level stuff that people who believe in nurture-not-nature instantly dismiss, never mind empirically measured differences in brain behaviors and the effects of hormones. Even as babies, give a boy a problem to work around and he'll just keep on trying to work around it (e.g., to get to a toy behind a glass barrier), while the girl will typically just sit down and cry, and thus get help to resolve her problem.

Beyond that, it matters how much actual family the man has. After a divorce, a man has just LOST his family. I'm sorry, but no amount of "teaching" how to deal with feelings and sadness will get you through that. Friends will get you through that. Other family members will get you through that. I say this having been there, done that. You are well aware of my emotional maturity and awareness. Nonetheless, I strongly considered suicide. It felt like I had nothing to live for. It's that "nothing to live for" feeling that results in suicide becoming a choice.

Yes, there is a difference between men and women, here. Women will instinctively gravitate towards finding social support. Men don't. But that's not a "how to deal with feelings" issue. It's one of those weird hard-wired things that can be compensated for (by having friends and family) but not taught, really. (Going into the "why" of this, for which I have ample evidence and goes into overall psychological principles of how people's unconscious works, would be to go wayyyy off topic. I've been working on a thread idea along these lines, but it hasn't jelled as I'm still researching/reading.) The main point I'm making here is that yes, there is something that emotionally needs to happen, but it is not "learn how to deal with emotions the way girls do".

Excellent. Yes of course there are many reasons. I noticed you didn't mention the major 'cause/link' that has been researched. Perhaps you've never been married. Are you? Been divorced? Lets talk about research on the matter.

"One recent study by the National Institute for Healthcare Research in Rockville, MD (2001) indicates that divorced people are three times as likely to commit suicide as people who are married. The Institute says that divorce now ranks as the number one factor linked with suicide rates in major U.S. cities, ranking above all other physical, financial, and psychological factors.

A study of 13 European countries by the regional European office of the World Health Organization found that divorce was the only factor linked with suicide in every one of the 13 countries. The study showed that factors like poverty, unemployment, and disability were associated with divorce in some of the countries but that disruption of the family was the only factor linked with divorce in all 13."

Here is another study from the Journal of Epidemiology and community health.

"These results dramatise the terrible consequences of being a divorced man in America, and lead to the question: why are divorced men killing themselves? Some analysts argue that the research community has ignored a plausible explanation for the excess suicide risks experienced by divorced men. As Perrault3 and Farrell4 observe, while social, psychological, and even personal problems facing women are readily denounced, societal institutions tend to ignore or minimise male problems as evident in suicide statistics. For instance, in many jurisdictions in the US there seems to be an implicit assumption that the bond between a woman and her children is stronger than that between a man and his children.5 As a consequence, in a divorce settlement, custody of children is more likely to be given to the wife. In the end, the father loses not only his marriage, but his children. The result may be anger at the court system especially in situations wherein the husband feels betrayed because it was the wife that initiated the divorce, or because the courts virtually gave away everything that was previously owned by the ex-husband or the now defunct household to the former wife. Events could spiral into resentment (toward the spouse and “the system”), bitterness, anxiety, and depression, reduced self esteem, and a sense of “life not worth living”. As depression and poor mental health are known markers of suicide risk, it may well be that one of the fundamental reasons for the observed association between divorce and suicide in men is the impact of post divorce (court sanctioned) “arrangements”. Clearly this is an issue that needs further investigation."


Divorce and suicide risk -- Kposowa 57 (12): 993 -- Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health

Hmmm, where did these divorce laws come from? Who advocated and supported them? Hmmm.

Lark, do you have any evidence or links on the matter (male suicide) that you want to share?

Actually, the divorce laws (other than no-fault divorce) came from traditional values: a divorced woman, in the days before feminism held sway, had no means of support other than maybe her family taking her back in, therefore the court would be ensuring that the initial financial promise was kept (support for her and for any children). But with no-fault divorce plus full women's rights, the logistics completely change (as you well know).

I would say that current divorce laws are not a cause of male suicide, but they are a salt-on-the-wound kind of thing.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

I don't think that's at all reflected in the article I posted, which indicts men and women, especially mothers and fathers, for perpetuating the notions that boys should not express their emotions. Seriously, I wish y'all would just read it instead of making up what you think it says because it uses the term "toxic masculinity" and you have a whole lot of knee-jerk reactions to that one term.

I also don't think your characterization of what feminists think patriarchy is is accurate, but again, I don't want to (further) shit up this thread by dragging it into what the fuck feminism is and isn't. Though a whole lot of accusations get leveled at feminism in threads of this nature and it's really fucking tiresome to let them go by, even knowing that it's pointless to engage.

I will read both of the articles after work.

I thought Patriarchy, in its basic essence, was a society favoring men and giving preference to traditionally male traits and qualities over those traditionally considered feminine. I don't believe we're living in that right now. If we were, there is no way our school system would be so unbalanced.

 

[Ivy]

Done. See y'all.

 

[Lark]

Or how to deal with failure, period. There are so many people, who haven't experienced failure, either because they were shielded from it or told it was unacceptable. And when it happens, and it always does, everything collapses. Looking at divorce, I can say that for men, even when they 100% wanted out of their marriage and life became much better after, there is always some residue of failure. My husband had it and was resistant to getting help but we did it together in therapy. He's always said talking that helped create a better foundation for us as a couple.

That fear of failure is colossal here, definitely in the populations characterised as deprived and in which intergenerational abuse or neglect takes place on generation after another repeatedly, I've known people who'd rather go hungry than go into an unfamiliar restaurant and suffer the possible embarrassment of not knowing how to go about approaching the till and asking for food (even with the homogenisation of coffee shops and restaurants).

I link it myself with earlier theories propounded by Erich Fromm, maybe just because I like his theories but they go on making sense and I see them reinvented, about the fear of freedom, everyone has the inbuilt drive to freedom, although it can cause emotional conflict like any other drive and people repress it as a result like any other drive or channel it some way to relieve the conflict, subservience to strong leader figures, conformity to popular ideas etc.

A lot of people are ill equipped for the challenges that are just part of life.

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

I think men's issues can stand on their own.

Since this thread has evolved somewhat, I can't help but see that women's rights have actually helped the idea of a man being seen as vulnerable and that being okay.

If people's views of women can incorporate strength, hard-assedness, typical male traits then the more HUMAN she becomes.

All men don't have to feel forced into that role if it doesn't come naturally. By one gender changing, the other will as well.

Likewise, if women who have those typical male characteristics are able to take those roles it leaves more room for men to take the typical female roles of nurturer, helper.

I mean, this is egalitarian. Social contructs can become more flexible. Less judgemental. Which may reduce this pressure men feel.

 

[uumlau]

I think men's issues can stand on their own.

Since this thread has evolved somewhat, I can't help but see that women's rights have actually helped the idea of a man being seen as vulnerable and that being okay.

If people's views of women can incorporate strength, hard-assedness, typical male traits then the more HUMAN she becomes.

All men don't have to feel forced into that role if it doesn't come naturally. By one gender changing, the other will as well.

Likewise, if women who have those typical male characteristics are able to take those roles it leaves more room for men to take the typical female roles of nurturer, helper.

I mean, this is egalitarian. Social contructs can become more flexible. Less judgemental. Which may reduce this pressure men feel.

I think they do become more flexible, but I think it might be more like iron->steel, not iron->silly putty. Social constructs are part of the equation, but they don't comprise its entirety. The answer to the question "nature or nurture?" is, emphatically, YES!

 

[uumlau]

Or how to deal with failure, period. There are so many people, who haven't experienced failure, either because they were shielded from it or told it was unacceptable. And when it happens, and it always does, everything collapses. Looking at divorce, I can say that for men, even when they 100% wanted out of their marriage and life became much better after, there is always some residue of failure. My husband had it and was resistant to getting help but we did it together in therapy. He's always said talking that helped create a better foundation for us as a couple.

Yeah, dealing with failure is a huge part of it. On one level, failure makes us stronger, but on another level it can be very wounding. Interestingly, there is research on how this plays out, in terms of trauma. As long as one is in the right age range (male or female), if the trauma happens in the late teens or early adulthood, it's fairly easily overcome and tend to strengthen character. Younger than that, and it tends to result in PTSD and similar issues. Later than that, and people find it really difficult to recover. The article I linked mentioned middle-aged white men as having the growing suicide rate, not younger men or older men. They hit middle age, end up getting divorced perhaps, and at that point it feels like everything they worked towards their entire lives just ended, and there's nothing left to strive for.

 

[Luke O]

I'm going to speak on this from a personal viewpoint because I'm a man and years ago I seriously thought about ending my own life. My most suicidal period was between 18 and 21, which also happened to be the time I went to University.

I don't think there was one single cause and in the case of any man who wants to kill himself I don't think you can narrow it down to just one thing. I don't even like talking about this period of my life but now I feel I have to the way this discussion is going.

Firstly, you'd be glad to know Feminism isn't to blame. For me, what was to blame was:

Possibilities - This was that time in my life where I went from feeling that the world was my oyster, that there was so much I could achieve and had the ability to grasp it. I realised as soon as I began to really make an effort at University and fucked up at every turn that I wasn't this intelligent guy that everyone else made me out to be, basically the only redeeming factor I felt I had. I left University with a bad grade and no prospects, so what was the point in continuing?

Loneliness - They say University was supposed to be the best time of your life and that you'll meet your real friends there. Despite my best efforts to socialise with people, they would generally avoid me on purpose. There were a few people I would hang around with, but they weren't really friends and I'm not in contact with any of them any more. I spent a lot of time at University, a lot of it spent on the campus computers trying to find people online to talk to and going home quite late. There were times when I wouldn't get to speak irl to anyone for weeks at a time. The class divide played a part too as I do have a working class background, and everyone else I spoke to wasn't.

Purpose - I felt like I didn't mean anything to anyone. I had no friends (I wasn't popular in school anyway but I had friends from time to time), was still not romantically involved with anyone and I felt kind of disowned by my parents - we didn't do anything together any more, my dad was really annoyed with me as he had such high hopes for me only to crash and burn. It was soul destroying and I did spend a lot of time looking into suicide methods, and spending time on suicide newsgroups finding others to speak to about this. The only entity that I felt that cared was one of our dogs and he died infront of me. During this period I didn't care about my body and regularly self harmed.

Late 2001 I wrote a suicide note, posted it online on a forum I was on and I was seriously going to kill myself. Someone in Scotland saw it, called the Police and an officer went round my house. Me and my mom had a talk (we wouldn't mention this to my dad, I don't think he knows still, to this day). I would try to do better. I survived.

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

I think they do become more flexible, but I think it might be more like iron->steel, not iron->silly putty. Social constructs are part of the equation, but they don't comprise its entirety. The answer to the question "nature or nurture?" is, emphatically, YES!

Not sure. Did you think I was saying that it was the entirety? Trying to understand your reply in relation to what I stated. Did you mean that men are by nature a certain way? Could you elaborate?

 

[uumlau]

Not sure. Did you think I was saying that it was the entirety? Trying to understand your reply in relation to what I stated. Did you mean that men are by nature a certain way? Could you elaborate?

Everyone is, by nature, a certain way. If the social constructs don't align with those innate properties, they tend to cause strife. There is room for flexibility, because there are lots of "right ways" for the social constructs to align, but it isn't infinite flexibility because there are many more ways in which they would not align. Put simply, egalitarianism doesn't mean we need to treat men more like women and women more like men. (I'm not trying to put words in your mouth or use straw men - just fleshing out my idea, here.) It means that we need to respect how men express themselves and we need to respect how women express themselves. If a man prefers to be more emotionally open, we should accept that, but if a man wants to be more emotionally distant, we should respect that, too.

That's the only way to ensure that the social constructs align. But many people (not saying you) tend to want to push the pendulum past the point of equilibrium and enforce OTHER incompatible constructs of their own devising.

Relevant to this particular topic is my thread on the Autistic man who had a therapy that made him suddenly extremely emotionally aware of everyone. He went from being emotionally distant and well-adapted to being emotionally distant, to being emotionally sensitive and quite ill-adapted to being emotionally sensitive. It was torture for him. (Though he thought it would be wonderful to explore this new world of emotions and his participation in the therapy was completely voluntary.) He didn't realize how much people relied on him being emotionally distant.