Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Applying the Dharma to social justice issues – race, religion, sexuality and identity
Dan74
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 8:57 pm

Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by Dan74 » Sun Oct 07, 2018 2:46 am

**rant alert! or rather a longish piece that summarises my reflections on the issue. would be interested to hear from those who take the time to read it..

Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ****hole (or at least try)

Reading the harrowing stories emerging from the #metoo or indeed, the shocking statistics of domestic violence and recent tragedies like the rape and murder of Eurydice Dixon, I can’t help but feel deeply dismayed.

To be honest I am tempted to shrug it all off and say that none of it has anything to do with me – I don’t go around harassing women, let alone raping and murdering. There are, and have always been, psychopaths, people who abuse their power, so it’s about psychopathology or faulty systems that have allowed for abuse to happen and continue unchecked.

And then there is another voice. One that took a real form, when our friend Catherine, having cooked up a storm for us, sat me down and started the evening conversation by loudly proclaiming “Daniel, your sex is a disgrace!” Her husband and three pubescent boys were within an earshot. So, is it? Was my adolescent delight in the 80’s coming of age flicks a sign of my misogyny? The frat pranks, the bad jokes, the furtive inappropriate fantasies? Is masculinity and especially male sexuality toxic? And if so, is a detox even an option, or indeed a moral imperative?

All throughout civilisation, human beings had to temper their urges and conform to prevailing social norms. The glaring exceptions were the so-called deviants and the powerful. Freud famously mapped it out as a conflict between the dark and unruly id, the repository of all the unconscious stirrings, and the superego, an internalised moral and social imperative, an inner authority figure. The superego would love nothing more than get rid of the id, and vice versa. Simplistic, as this representation may be, the current culture war can be seen as yet another iteration in this perennial battle.

So can the superego finally win? Can we expunge these primitive inappropriate aspects of ourselves and behave in a responsible mature way as men? My answer is no and yes. These are actually two separate questions. No, we cannot truly expunge these primitive aspects. As Tom Waits sings “You can drive out nature with a pitchfork, but it always comes roaring back again.” Human nature is messy, and anyone who messes with it and tries to fit it into the procrustean bed of modern sensibilities, is bound to create a sterile mockery of what it means to be human. And nowhere is it messier than sexuality. Mess with it and get a generation or more of resentful emasculated boys, uncomfortable in their bodies and teeming with a deeper and darker anger at women than ever before.

So what is it that we can do? Should we just take refuge in the ‘boys will be boys,’ a polite way to tell the women sharing their heart-wrenching stories, that they are just wasting their breath? Is there something more?

I suggest that there is a middle way through this treacherous terrain. A way that accepts the messy nature of sexuality but also develops and nurtures respect for women, as well as an understanding of how our actions impact them. This should be an integral way of growing up.
The two vital aspects here is respect and empathy. In a society where we are encouraged to treat each other and ourselves as a commodity, where one’s worth is often measured in what they are worth, respect is unsurprisingly in short supply. It is also unsurprising that many hanker for the ‘good ol times’, irrespective of how good they truly were. And yet, as parents if we both model self-respect and respect for one and another, that does serve as something of a bulwark against the pervasive dearth of either modelled by so many in the public arena. True respect for women starts at home with our relationship to our mothers and sisters. And this is also where true listening often starts.

As we read and listen to the women’s stories, as we are confronted by the horrific results of unbridled male sexuality, if we can bring ourselves to listen to both the voices of our nature and the heart-felt voices of women, in this space of listening, the middle path is born and we can truly take responsibility for being a man. It is not an easy path to hold and attempt to reconcile these seemingly conflicting aspects, to be a full-blooded sexual man who genuinely treats women with respect and empathy and not many examples seem to abound in the public sphere these days. But this indeed is our moral imperative. Do not succumb to either one of the extremes.

User avatar
KathyLauren
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2018 3:12 pm
Location: East coast of Canada

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by KathyLauren » Sun Oct 07, 2018 12:13 pm

:goodpost:
Parents modeling respect to their children is a good start.

But as the saying goes, boys will be boys, and part of good parenting is whupping the asses of children who disregard the modeling of their parents. It doesn't have to resort to physical violence, in spite of the phraseology, but discipline is an important component of parenting.

I can think of prepubescent boys in positions of power who could benefit from a good ass-whupping.

Om mani padme hum
Kathy
#metoo

Bundokji
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 9:03 pm

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by Bundokji » Mon Oct 08, 2018 3:34 pm

Hello Dan74,

I hope you don't find this unrelated, but i am interested in your opinion:

When your friend told you that your sex is a disgrace, was she off balance in any way? and if so, how?

In a dependently originated world, would it be incorrect to say that if men (collectively, not as individuals) nowadays are off balance, then there is a corresponding/complementing side of the equation by females?
'Too much knowledge leads to scepticism. Early devotees are the likeliest apostates, as early sinners are senile saints.' – Will Durant.

justsit
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2018 12:19 pm

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by justsit » Tue Oct 09, 2018 2:06 am

Bundokji wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 3:34 pm
Hello Dan74,

When your friend told you that your sex is a disgrace, was she off balance in any way? and if so, how?

In a dependently originated world, would it be incorrect to say that if men (collectively, not as individuals) nowadays are off balance, then there is a corresponding/complementing side of the equation by females?
Not sure what you mean by "off balance?" Psychologically? Politically extreme? Floundering? Incorrect?

Dan74
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 8:57 pm

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by Dan74 » Tue Oct 09, 2018 6:15 am

Kathy, thank you for replying. I think I've largely failed there (at least with one out of 3 children), though it appears that most other parents around are even less authoritative and more permissive than I. But yes, in theory I agree. In practice it somehow doesn't always work out.


Bundokji, I'd rather not discuss the specific person too much. Everyone has reasons for feeling the way they do, but the reason I mentioned this anecdote was because this stance is not unusual in suburban Australia, though maybe Catherine was more direct than usual in expressing it.

Bundokji
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 9:03 pm

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by Bundokji » Tue Oct 09, 2018 8:16 am

justsit wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 2:06 am
Bundokji wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 3:34 pm
Hello Dan74,

When your friend told you that your sex is a disgrace, was she off balance in any way? and if so, how?

In a dependently originated world, would it be incorrect to say that if men (collectively, not as individuals) nowadays are off balance, then there is a corresponding/complementing side of the equation by females?
Not sure what you mean by "off balance?" Psychologically? Politically extreme? Floundering? Incorrect?
Hello justsit,

In the context of this thread, Dan (if i understood him correctly) presented types of behavior which are often perceived as "extreme" hence they are causing suffering. As many women are experiencing suffering due to some males behavior, then it can be concluded that women's perceptive, generally speaking, is the criteria. On the one hand, most women want to be perceived as attractive, evident by the length they go to taking care of their appearances. On the other hand, women feel very uncomfortable when men harass them. They feel equally uncomfortable when any presented solution to the problem of harassment involves suggestions of how women should compromise or change their behavior. From women's perspective, this is akin to blaming the victim. Women should be free to dress and behave the way they like without being threatened and harassed.

Also Dan used a multi layered view of the human psyche to explain the problem. He described a dark side in us, and he explained our internal struggle of how to deal with this dark side. This raises the question: what makes this aspect of ourselves dark in the first place? because the rules of the game of sexuality seem to be different than the usual rules of engagement between human beings. For example, in the context of sexuality, sexual organs which are usually perceived as dirty, often seen as attractive to the extent that some humans perform oral sex.

Sexuality seem to have a logic of its own. If we accept that the process of reproduction is the survival of the fittest, then the fittest does not have to match our per-conceived ideas of right and wrong, and when we try to use our ideas of right and wrong as the criteria, we find a lot of human behavior to be blameworthy. We end up with a lot of frustration and misunderstanding between the two sexes. We also encounter reactions similar to the ones made by Dan's friend, or we might end up with some men describing women as "gold diggers" for example.

I also think that explaining the dark side of female sexuality is less explored and acknowledged in the world we live in. The fact that some novels/movies such as 50 shades of grey became too popular among many women might be interpreted by some that respect has very little to do when it comes to the game of sexuality. Also some statistical data might come as shocking to some:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... -fantasies

All of the above raises question on whether modern humans (especially westerners) are as sexually liberated as they believe themselves to be:

'Too much knowledge leads to scepticism. Early devotees are the likeliest apostates, as early sinners are senile saints.' – Will Durant.

User avatar
KathyLauren
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2018 3:12 pm
Location: East coast of Canada

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by KathyLauren » Tue Oct 09, 2018 1:19 pm

Bundokji wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 8:16 am
On the one hand, most women want to be perceived as attractive, evident by the length they go to taking care of their appearances. On the other hand, women feel very uncomfortable when men harass them. They feel equally uncomfortable when any presented solution to the problem of harassment involves suggestions of how women should compromise or change their behavior. From women's perspective, this is akin to blaming the victim.
The one hand / other hand form of this argument is part of the problem.

I like to take care of my appearance. I like to look pretty. It is not to attract men (Eww). It is not even to attract women. It is not to attract anyone. I do it because I like to: it makes me happy. While attracting mates is one reason that some women might take care of their appearance, it is not the only reason, nor even the main reason.

Yes, I feel uncomfortable when men harass me. Why wouldn't I? I am not a tease. I do not lead men on in any way. And yet a segment of society wants me to think that I am somehow responsible for my own harassment.

The "one hand / other hand" argument form is an attempt to manufacture a contradiction out of these two thoughts where none naturally exists. Why on earth should it be incumbent on me to dress in a dowdy manner in order to manipulate men into treating me as a human being?

Om mani padme hum
Kathy

Bundokji
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 9:03 pm

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by Bundokji » Tue Oct 09, 2018 3:52 pm

KathyLauren wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 1:19 pm
The one hand / other hand form of this argument is part of the problem.

I like to take care of my appearance. I like to look pretty. It is not to attract men (Eww). It is not even to attract women. It is not to attract anyone. I do it because I like to: it makes me happy. While attracting mates is one reason that some women might take care of their appearance, it is not the only reason, nor even the main reason.

Yes, I feel uncomfortable when men harass me. Why wouldn't I? I am not a tease. I do not lead men on in any way. And yet a segment of society wants me to think that I am somehow responsible for my own harassment.

The "one hand / other hand" argument form is an attempt to manufacture a contradiction out of these two thoughts where none naturally exists. Why on earth should it be incumbent on me to dress in a dowdy manner in order to manipulate men into treating me as a human being?

Om mani padme hum
Kathy
Thanks Kathy,

I did not say that women take care of their appearances only to attract men. However, may i use your input to highlight the role of intentions here?

In public discourse, when we deal with the other, the question of intention is often neglected. Unless there is a criminal case or direct harm, the question of intention is not usually raised, and even in the cases when its raised, it is difficult to prove due to the private nature of our thoughts. We usually try to infer intentions from behavior, and it can always be disputed because it can no longer be experienced first hand.

So, from a purely legal/conventional point of view, you are quite correct. Whatever women choose to do, this does not justify sexual harassment. The problem, as i see it, is that we are too busy trying to justify our existence instead of understanding it. This is why we might identify/label some thoughts as mere fantasies which says nothing about who we really are, and identify other thoughts as reflecting our real selves. The criteria, of course, is our ability to keep the former hidden from public discourse while revealing the later.
Therein what is “deceit”? Herein a certain one having performed wrong action with the body, having performed wrong action with speech, having performed wrong action with the mind, to hide that (action) evokes an bad wish; he wishes thus, “May no-one know me”;
he thinks thus, “May no-one know me”; he says the words thus, “May no-one know me”; he tries with the body thus, “May no-one know me”; that which is similar, deceit, being deceitful, glossing over, deception, cheating, confusing the issue, evading, concealment, secrecy, hiding, covering, not making clear, not making known, hiding well, subterfuge. This is called deceit.
https://legacy.suttacentral.net/en/vb17

And as Sigmund Freud was mentioned in the OP:
When i set myself the task of bringing to light what human beings keep hidden within them ... i thought the task was a harder one than it really is. He that has eyes to see and ears to hear may convince himself that no mortal can keep a secret. If his lips are silent, he chatters with his finger-tips, betrayal oozes out of him at every pore
At the end of the day, intentions of humans, whether men or women, will always remain private. And yet, actions has fruits that do not necessarily materialize in the short term. The Buddha said:
Truly, an evil deed committed does not immediately bear fruit, like milk that does not turn sour all at once. But smoldering, it follows the fool like fire covered by ashes.
More generally, the mere idea that in one species, the males are unruly and evil, while the females are innocent and pure is not only extremely unlikely, but also naive. All in my opinion.
'Too much knowledge leads to scepticism. Early devotees are the likeliest apostates, as early sinners are senile saints.' – Will Durant.

User avatar
KathyLauren
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2018 3:12 pm
Location: East coast of Canada

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by KathyLauren » Tue Oct 09, 2018 4:58 pm

Bundokji, I will take your word that you believe there is some connection between your comments on intention and my post. The connection is not apparent, though.

Om mani padme hum
Kathy

Bundokji
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 9:03 pm

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by Bundokji » Tue Oct 09, 2018 5:29 pm

KathyLauren wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 4:58 pm
Bundokji, I will take your word that you believe there is some connection between your comments on intention and my post. The connection is not apparent, though.

Om mani padme hum
Kathy
Your post included sharing your personal intentions, as a woman, on why you choose to look pretty. You indicated that in your case it has nothing to do with attracting men. While in my original post, i did not mention that women take care of their appearances only to attract men.

The relevance of intentions seems to be related to the "on the other hand" side which you protested. In your view, as i understood it, there is no "on the other hand" because the responsibility for harassment becomes somehow shared. I acknowledged your point from a legal and conventional point of view because we have no direct access to each other's intentions, and regardless of women's intentions, harassment should not be justified.

And yet, i tried to go beyond justifications which is often related to appearances. For example, a lawyer might be able to justify wrong actions using loopholes in the system, but Kamma is inescapable and goes beyond the games we play both internally and externally.

Again, i am not a mind reader, but what Dan's friend told him about his sex seems to become more common. The current approach do not seem to be solving the problem but increasing the polarization. When Dan mentioned the murder of Eurydice Dixon i became curious as i had no previous knowledge of the case. I typed her name on Youtube, and to my own disappointment, i watched a couple of videos where the presenters are criticizing and attacking a police officer because he was advising women on how to take care of their safety. The comments on the two videos also reflect how polarized the world we live in is becoming. The victim seem to be forgotten and used as another tool to fuel identity politics.
'Too much knowledge leads to scepticism. Early devotees are the likeliest apostates, as early sinners are senile saints.' – Will Durant.

Dan74
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 8:57 pm

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by Dan74 » Tue Oct 09, 2018 6:07 pm

Yes, there are extreme voices whom the media is only too eager to take up. Following several horrific rapes and murders in Melbourne, the idea of imposing a curfew on men was canvassed in the mainstream media. But there are also many sensible voices that are inclusive rather than vilifying and actually focus on tackling the issues rather than scoring points.

User avatar
KathyLauren
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2018 3:12 pm
Location: East coast of Canada

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by KathyLauren » Tue Oct 09, 2018 6:14 pm

Bundokji wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 5:29 pm
The relevance of intentions seems to be related to the "on the other hand" side which you protested. In your view, as i understood it, there is no "on the other hand" because the responsibility for harassment becomes somehow shared.
??? :shrug:

We are obviously failing to communicate. You are clearly not understanding me, and I admit to not understanding you. We may have to leave it at that.

Om mani padme hum
Kathy

Dan74
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 8:57 pm

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by Dan74 » Tue Oct 09, 2018 9:01 pm

I am guessing Bundokji is trying to push against the common narrative around these matters in the anglophone world. For instance when the police in Victoria issued advice about the places for women to avoid at night, it was taken as victim blaming by some people with many indignant posts about 'why should I not be able to go there?'

There are areas where men should not go at night either. But of course it is far from ideal that women, much more so than men, need to fear and be extra-cautious when out and about at night. Is this something we should just accept as society? No. We should do what we can to make it safer for women. Are they right to complain?? Yes, they are, but it's not the police fault and their advice was not only well-intentioned but potentially useful too. The trouble I see is that people don't parse these issues but lump things together.

As for dressing and being attractive, I guess it is a matter of interpretation and conditioning. I grew up mostly in the West where women wore fairly revealing clothes. But even so, when I went back to University 3 years ago in Melbourne, I was shocked just how much more revealing the clothes had become and found it frankly, unsettling. I've heard women making similar comments as well. Where is the boundary between dressing beautifully or in a sexy manner and dressing as a slut? Is there even such a thing?? Do you think, Kathy, most men will be filled with respect when they see a young woman on Campus dressed in shorts that show most of her buttocks, or in a skirt that doesn't actually cover her underwear? There are mixed signals being sent, since clothes are a form of language too and I guess this is what I find in bad taste to see this at a place of learning. But I know I've become conservative in my old age!

As a father of a young girl, I try to raise her with self-respect and with respect for others, treating her looks as just something she was born with, while putting her energy into other things. There are natural forces at work and she may well go through a period of worrying about looks too much (adolescent boys do too) but ultimately I trust that looks will not be a major thing in her life. And I hope she will be mindful of what she communicates through her choice of clothes.

User avatar
KathyLauren
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2018 3:12 pm
Location: East coast of Canada

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by KathyLauren » Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:39 am

Dan74 wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 9:01 pm
But of course it is far from ideal that women, much more so than men, need to fear and be extra-cautious when out and about at night. Is this something we should just accept as society? No. We should do what we can to make it safer for women. Are they right to complain?? Yes, they are, but it's not the police fault and their advice was not only well-intentioned but potentially useful too. The trouble I see is that people don't parse these issues but lump things together.
I agree.

Of course women should bear some responsibility for their own safety. We should not step out into traffic without looking. We should not walk under ladders. We should avoid dangerous people, and the places where they can be expected.

But the fact that those dangerous people are almost exclusively men indicates that society has a problem with men that needs to be addressed. And the fact that police and other authorities need to remind women of the need to beware of such men is another indication of that problem. It is not that the warnings are inappropriate. It is that making woman responsible for avoiding the men who are the problem, without at the same time addressing the problem men is unfair.
As for dressing and being attractive, I guess it is a matter of interpretation and conditioning. I grew up mostly in the West where women wore fairly revealing clothes. But even so, when I went back to University 3 years ago in Melbourne, I was shocked just how much more revealing the clothes had become and found it frankly, unsettling. I've heard women making similar comments as well. Where is the boundary between dressing beautifully or in a sexy manner and dressing as a slut? Is there even such a thing??
There is not a boundary. It is a continuum, so lines are imaginary. Your "line" will be different from mine or someone else's.
Do you think, Kathy, most men will be filled with respect when they see a young woman on Campus dressed in shorts that show most of her buttocks, or in a skirt that doesn't actually cover her underwear? There are mixed signals being sent, since clothes are a form of language too and I guess this is what I find in bad taste to see this at a place of learning. But I know I've become conservative in my old age!
Are clothes really a form of language? Signals are only a language if there is agreement on what the signals represent. Without agreement, it is just noise. It is rather clear from the discussion that there is no agreement on the meaning. Therefore, clothes are not a language.

It may be unreasonable to demand that men have no impure thoughts when seeing a scantily-clad girl. But it is reasonable, and indeed imperative, to demand that they have enough self-restraint not to act on those thoughts without consent.
As a father of a young girl, I try to raise her with self-respect and with respect for others, treating her looks as just something she was born with, while putting her energy into other things. There are natural forces at work and she may well go through a period of worrying about looks too much (adolescent boys do too) but ultimately I trust that looks will not be a major thing in her life. And I hope she will be mindful of what she communicates through her choice of clothes.
That is good. But the topic, after all, is toxic masculinity, not toxic femininity. Do you have boys? if so, do you teach them not to act on their urges even when faced with a scantily-clad girl, unless the girl confirms her consent?

Om mani padme hum
Kathy

chownah
Posts: 501
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 2:08 am

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by chownah » Wed Oct 10, 2018 3:07 am

KathyLauren wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:39 am
Are clothes really a form of language? Signals are only a language if there is agreement on what the signals represent. Without agreement, it is just noise. It is rather clear from the discussion that there is no agreement on the meaning. Therefore, clothes are not a language.
"Therefore, clothes are not a language?"......this seems so wrong to me and it seems to me that there are so many ways that it can be shown to be absolutely wrong that I won't put much effort here into confirming the fact that for the vast majority of people around the world clothing is primarily a media for communication and secondly protection from the elements.

Consider that with respect to a written exchange of words you said "We are obviously failing to communicate. You are clearly not understanding me, and I admit to not understanding you. We may have to leave it at that." Does this failure to communicate mean that the written word is not language....and just noise?
chownah
Image
Image

Bundokji
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 9:03 pm

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by Bundokji » Wed Oct 10, 2018 4:01 am

The following interview of Jordan Peterson on Vice News is very relevant to the topic in hand in my opinion. It discusses sexual harassment at the work place and try to draw the lines.



Its worth noting that forcing women to cover up have not solved the problem either. I have many friends who worked in Saudi Arabia and told me a lot of stories about the obsession about sex and how separating the two sexes and controlling women is causing a lot of harm. It is simply sending the wrong messages as clothes are indeed a form of language. Or as Dan puts it in the OP: "You can drive out nature with a pitchfork, but it always comes roaring back again"
'Too much knowledge leads to scepticism. Early devotees are the likeliest apostates, as early sinners are senile saints.' – Will Durant.

User avatar
lyndon taylor
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 8:30 pm
Location: US occupied Northern Mexico

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by lyndon taylor » Wed Oct 10, 2018 9:55 am

What a nut case!!!!
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk.

http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/

User avatar
KathyLauren
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2018 3:12 pm
Location: East coast of Canada

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by KathyLauren » Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:17 pm

Bundokji wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 4:01 am
The following interview of Jordan Peterson on Vice News is very relevant to the topic in hand in my opinion.
It is possible that Jordan Peterson may have something relevant to say. But I can't bring myself to listen to 17 minutes of a guy whose rise to fame was based on a lie that was aimed at depriving me (and others like me) of basic rights.

Om mani padme hum
Kathy

Bundokji
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 9:03 pm

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by Bundokji » Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:24 pm

KathyLauren wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:17 pm
Bundokji wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 4:01 am
The following interview of Jordan Peterson on Vice News is very relevant to the topic in hand in my opinion.
It is possible that Jordan Peterson may have something relevant to say. But I can't bring myself to listen to 17 minutes of a guy whose rise to fame was based on a lie that was aimed at depriving me (and others like me) of basic rights.

Om mani padme hum
Kathy
As far as I know, Dr. Peterson never had a problem with trans people, but with a certain law. Needless to say that his opinion on a certain issue does not necessarily affect the validity of his opinion on other issues
'Too much knowledge leads to scepticism. Early devotees are the likeliest apostates, as early sinners are senile saints.' – Will Durant.

User avatar
Dorje Shedrub
Posts: 449
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 10:47 pm
Location: Northern Indiana

Re: Toxic Masculinity? Or how to be a real man but not an ***hole (or at least try)

Post by Dorje Shedrub » Wed Oct 10, 2018 4:39 pm

chownah wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 3:07 am
KathyLauren wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:39 am
Are clothes really a form of language? Signals are only a language if there is agreement on what the signals represent. Without agreement, it is just noise. It is rather clear from the discussion that there is no agreement on the meaning. Therefore, clothes are not a language.
"Therefore, clothes are not a language?"......this seems so wrong to me and it seems to me that there are so many ways that it can be shown to be absolutely wrong that I won't put much effort here into confirming the fact that for the vast majority of people around the world clothing is primarily a media for communication and secondly protection from the elements.
I don't think that you can speak for the vast majority of people around the world in saying clothing is primarily a media for communication.

DS
"As far as social economic theory is concerned, I am Marxist. " ~ HHDL

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 15 guests