Strong people build others up. Weak people knock them down to feel big. You want to feel like a strong man? Protect others and be generous with your spirit.
You want to feel like a strong man? Protect others and be generous with your spirit.
Fucking this. Strong men—strong people—help others. Healthy or not, realistic or not, this is the message that’s been sold to us since time immemorial. The knight that slays the dragon and saves the kingdom. The alien that crash lands and moonlights as a superhero. The sled dog runs 261 miles to bring the medicine to a town beset by an epidemic.
Yes, sure, one can argue some romanticism (or propaganda) with any given example. But the overall message of heroism, of strength, is not one of selfishness or of “me and mine”.
Heroism is something we ought to focus more on as a culture in general. Doing things simply because they are right and protecting others who cannot protect themselves cannot be understated.
I think a challenge with “right” is that it is subjective. For example, there are people today who believe that doing what’s “right” entails doing things that hurt people, or deprive them of happiness, or even a future. Or, that doing what’s “right” means only helping your family or your friends or your church or your Elks club.
I would say heroism has plenty of cultural emphasis already, perhaps too much even. The prevalence of superhero movies, calling anyone who served in the military a hero, all of the nurses/caregivers/essential workers during covid: there are so many examples of loud proclamations of heroism in US/Anglo culture. It is clearly a value held by the vast majority of people.
I think instead we should be looking at the messages people are actually getting from all the hero worship, rather than what we think are the important take-aways. Things like exceptionalism, having strength to prevail against one's enemies, making hard decisions for "the greater good". Finding good stories to combat these potentially damaging and counterproductive ideas is where we should be focusing our cultural energies IMO, rather than more hero worship.
Semi-related, as this reminded me of a quote from Cary Grant:
I pretended to be somebody I wanted to be and I finally became that person. Or he became me.
This was then repurposed on Star Trek Strange New Worlds by chief engineer Pelia (from a species that lives several centuries):
Most heroes I've seen... are just pretending half the time. There's this one guy I remember, he said to me, 'I always pretended to be someone I wanted to be, until finally, I became that someone, or he became me.'
There are fun casual LARP or Nerf groups all over the place. Most of them would love to have more people coming out to the park on the weekend. Bring friends, or make some while you're there!
In my head I made many cutting remarks. But the reality of this level of cognitive decline is like 90% miserably depressing and only like 10% infuriating. Plus he wouldn't be capable of understanding the criticism anyway.
I don't know what it says about you if you do it deliberately but I think there's a lot to say for asking the question anyways because his speech filters don't work properly and he might not be able to censor himself.
Plumbing is the one thing I won't do myself in diy. If screw ups are made I want the responsible party to fix things, and I don't want to be that party.
Thank you to everyone in this thread who made me feel part of a community of my peers online for the first time, in a long time.
Every plumbing project (even yesterdays quick upgrade of the kitchen faucet) is at least a 2 tripper. Each time I finish one I swear I'm never moving again. Then, 5 years later, I'm fixing the previous owners mishaps "one last time".
To all the people who've bought houses I lived in, I'm sorry for all of the " what was that idiot thinking" moments I've caused you. Ha
So a trans person saying that he is a man, is not a real man? Or more adapted to context, a trans person saying that he wants to feel like a man, is not a real man? and doesn't deserve to feel like a man?
I don't agree with that at all. Weird thing to upvote tbh.
Edit:
Today I learned, when I advocate for trans rights, I get up votes. When I apply the same support to cis men, I get down voted.
I thought this is a supportive space in terms of gender identity. I guess I was wrong. I will continue to support trans people for the same reasons, I support everyone. Human rights.
I'd say it's rather that a trans person shouldn't prove anything to anyone, same as cis. If they feel the need to prove, that's likely because of influence of toxic gender standards
Well I don't know where you read the proving part. it is about feeling like a gender, not proving that you are. If you want to change topics, sure, we can talk about a different topic. Do you like Chinese food?
It is the logical conclusion of comment. Trans men are men. Unless you want to argue that they aren't. Or that the men in the comments were implied to be cis men and then want to argue that cis and trans people should be treated differently to each other and therefore a trans man have every right to want to feel like a man but a cis man doesn't.
Yes. And to be men the don't need to say that. Visibility is another thing, and in that regard one might argue that they need, but I think that increasing trans visibility is not the same as 'I am man' statements
Edit:
a trans man have every right to want to feel like a man but a cis man doesn't
To this I would also say 'No', but I'm starting to guess, we have a very different views on what it is to 'feel like a man'
Okay the post talks about "needing to feel like a man". (I am ignoring The comment on the picture because that is not what my issue is. My issue is the general statement in the post of the "aunt" in the picture and The comment section here) The comment is a reaction gifs and I think you agree that maybe you shouldn't take reaction gifs 100% literally without any adaption to the context. Here the context is men FEELING manly. So I think it is fair to understand it as "if you have to say that you want to feel manly, you aren't"
In that context, you can't remove looking like a man, or maybe doing stereotypical man stuff, or anything that makes that person feel manly. The questions are, of course, what the fuck do you need to feel manly? What causes you to say that? What are you requiring?
All Women need to submit to you? Well that is completely unreasonable and you are an idiot. Not wanting to have your living room painted in pink, rather reasonable.
I heavily reject the notion that you or me get to decide what makes someone feel manly. If it is something that would require something from someone else, Of course, there are reasonable requests and unreasonable requests. And you can reject to fulfill them, you can even mock them if you want, but they aren't less of a man for wanting to feel like one and painting that desire with a broad brush like in aunt's post is also pretty bad (and probably sexist)
Maybe we have a different view on what it is to feel like a man. But if that is the case, then tell me, why are we judging men for expressing that they want to feel like a man without asking them what the fuck they mean? Because we would mean different things, so why wouldn't they mean something else than you or me?
What is the point of the meme? How is it not ridiculing/dismissing the desire of a man to feel manly? Something that rightfully usually finds support here for trans man.
Because it's not ridiculing someone for feeling manly, it's ridiculing the kind of person that goes around stating they're manly as fuck all the time, going out of their way to show how manly they are and generally making "manliness" their entire personality.
The post in the picture, just completely dismiss any possibility other than a man wanting to feel superior.
That is the starting point, that is what I am talking about.
The comment in the picture provides us with a story and context but it is not the same story or context because it is a different user sharing their experience. I have no issue with that.
The reaction gif is implying that you aren't a man if you express that you want to feel like one.
Where does it say that you say it says? Where does it state that it is about making it your entire personality? Where does it say, it is about people who want to show how manly they? Where does it state that they don't like a man stating that they are so manly? It seems to be about the opposite. A man who struggles with feeling manly. Where does it state that it is something the person does all the time?
Some of these are inconsequential in some scenarios but all of them highlight how much you read in there that just is not present to justify toxic language and behavior.
You are correct, technically it doesn't. It is about kings, and the poster tells you to replace king with man.
Also technically it is saying that a trans person who tells you that they are a man, is not a real man. I mean trans men are men.
But I don't think that is a fair reading of the text. But sure you can read the message that I call toxic, as a toxic message to men in general and especially towards trans men. I just don't see where you want to go with that.
Alternatively, and admittedly, I am reading it in the context of the post in which it is about men expressing that they want to feel manly. Still toxic, and implicitly transphobic, but at least matching the post.
This place can be supportive of trans rights and also downvote bad logic and arguments.
Trans men don't "want to feel like a man". They are trans specifically because they already feel like a man.
In addition, your comment was a total non sequitur. We were talking about the fragile egos of certain cis men, and you brought up trans men. And did so in a way that makes you look like you're trying to be offended.
You seem like a good person. Please keep up the fight, but pick your battles a little more wisely.
A trans man feels like a man but before at least social transition, they probably don't feel like a man, in the sense that we have been talking about it. Which is why they transition.
It is ridiculous to read this and misunderstand what kind of "feeling like a man" we have been talking about.
I am Talking about trans men because 1. They are men. We talked about men. 2. It is bs, to act like you understand why a trans man wants to social transition but give shit to any (apparently cis) men when they want to have their gender affirmed.
Yes there are toxic men who expect ridiculous things from other people to feel affirmed, and often they are toxic. But this whole conversation is generalizations over generalization to toxic stereotypes. I am highlighting how much bs that is. Fucking treat people as individuals. If they want to meet their boys for a beer and discussing how the process of their different projects is going and what they might be able to do, to feel "manly", then why do you have to be toxic to them? How does that make them insecure? Is my mother insecure when she goes to a girls night?
People should fucking chill and if they want to judge people, be precise. Could you imagine how much the "immigrants are bad" folks would suffer if they had to be precise and explain to the class how their coworker is a good person and hard worker while being an immigrant, but all immigrants are lazy and criminal.
I am sick of the left copying right wing rhetoric. People are individuals and most of them are pretty cool.
So Where was my logic bad? Did we talk about fragile egos? No. We talked about a vague notion of men (not only cis) wanting to feel manly.
A guy wearing it properly wears it with no underwear, which given the temperatures up there in Scotland means he's quite literally a man with cold hard balls.
100% guy here, real man feel is when others can rely on me, when I can help, that kind of stuff. Not “big car hurr durr bbq male superyorr” and the likes.
I’m stumped at the simple task of trying to imagine what does imply to “feel like a man”.
I feel like a man when I know I've met all of my responsibilities to myself and the ones I care about, and that I've moved the world even an infinitesimally small way forward to help the others in it. This means lending a hand or an ear to those that need it either with my labor or my mind (or many time both).
I hope others have something close to this definition, but realistically I don't think its common.
I guess what confuses me about all of this is why these things are in any way manly?
Like being reliable and following through on your commitments. Is it masculine when someone who isn’t a man is like that?
Or if I’m told someone is manly, have I now learned that he is in fact dependable?
I don’t mean to try and excessively pick apart what you’re saying, it’s just something I’ve always really struggled with understanding. People always seem to say things that strike me as being ungendered character traits when they’re asked about their gender.
I guess what confuses me about all of this is why these things are in any way manly?
I don’t mean to try and excessively pick apart what you’re saying, it’s just something I’ve always really struggled with understanding. People always seem to say things that strike me as being ungendered character traits when they’re asked about their gender.
I think I see the issue you're encountering with the perspective you're communicating.
You're looking for things that are exclusively masculine. Besides the role in physical biological reproduction, I don't think there is anything exclusively masculine by that measure.
The traits I listed could absolutely apply to people that are not men. However, the phrase "manly" is referring to societal measures not biological reproductive process abilities. If we distill that down further for this conversation, "manly" translates to "being worthy of respect". We could dissect why "manly" translates to "being worthy of respect", but that's a tangent from your question.
Ergo, for a person that identifies with the biological reproductive role of a male, and would like to be seeing as being worthy of respect in society, then they should have favorable societal traits and behaviors, in my opinion, such as those I listed.
We could dissect why "manly" translates to "being worthy of respect", but that's a tangent from your question.
I think this pretty much gets to the root of the friction I experience when this topic comes up. I wouldn’t mind digging into it.
You likely have already guessed that I would think of it this way, but isn’t it just that “good people are worthy of respect”? Because it seems to me like if you try hard to take care of your family and do right by others, you’re a good person deserving of respect.
You know what I mean? If there’s no need for the trait to be exclusively masculine, then why do we do it? Translate “manly” into “worthy of respect”, that is. Is there some benefit to thinking about it in terms of masculinity rather than just in terms of goodness?
However, the phrase "manly" is referring to societal measures
they should have favorable societal traits and behaviors
Also, I do acknowledge this side of things. I wrote some thoughts about it in a reply to another comment in this thread, if you want to check that out. It’s an important point, and I don’t want you to think i’m just ignoring it. In summary, I think it’s kind of a bummer if in the end, manliness is just a tradition people feel compelled to participate in
You likely have already guessed that I would think of it this way, but isn’t it just that “good people are worthy of respect”? Because it seems to me like if you try hard to take care of your family and do right by others, you’re a good person deserving of respect.
You know what I mean? If there’s no need for the trait to be exclusively masculine, then why do we do it? Translate “manly” into “worthy of respect”, that is. Is there some benefit to thinking about it in terms of masculinity rather than just in terms of goodness?
You skipped the OTHER criteria I listed for being "manly" besides just "goodness", that being: for a person that identifies with the biological reproductive role of a male.
However, the phrase “manly” is referring to societal measures
they should have favorable societal traits and behaviors
Also, I do acknowledge this side of things. I wrote some thoughts about it in a reply to another comment in this thread, if you want to check that out. It’s an important point, and I don’t want you to think i’m just ignoring it. In summary, I think it’s kind of a bummer if in the end, manliness is just a tradition people feel compelled to participate in
I'm not sure, but I think you're hearing the "man" in "manly" and assuming the opposite would "woman", "gay", or "enby". Not the case. The opposite to "man" in this case is "boy".
We could dissect why “manly” translates to “being worthy of respect”, but that’s a tangent from your question.
I think this pretty much gets to the root of the friction I experience when this topic comes up. I wouldn’t mind digging into it.
Its the "man" vs "boy" part, as in, a sign of maturity, of coming of age where you stop being a young and selfish boy and can see where you are in the world and what responsibilities you have to yourself and those around you in society. Society has few expectations of responsibility for a "boy". Responsibilities with weight go to those with maturity. Mature boys being men. Even the phrase "man up" usually means "to stand up and face the challenge instead of shying away", or to take responsibility. A boy still be 40 years old if he doesn't take up his adult responsibilities. At 40 years old he still wouldn't be "manly".
If you are taking exception with these phrases being associated with "man", then your beef is really with the last 3000 or 4000 so years of history. The concepts of equality across genders and sexual orientation are relatively recent in the last 20-40 years. History doesn't stop being history simply because we've evolved beyond some of our worst parts of it. We carry baggage for awhile as our language evolves to match our new values. Expecting language to change on a dime isn't very realistic. We'll need a few generations to die off and take this language with them.
Its the “man” vs “boy” part, as in, a sign of maturity, of coming of age where you stop being a young and selfish boy and can see where you are in the world and what responsibilities you have to yourself and those around you in society.
I'm not who you're replying to, but I feel the same way as them. Take what I quoted from you above and replace man/boy with woman/girl. How is it any different? Maturity isn't gendered. Taking on adult responsibilities isn't gendered; heck you acknowledge that when you used the word "adult", it's right there in the language you used.
I'm not taking exception to thousands of years of history, because so many of the traits would still apply to both genders and aren't about equality. Keep in mind that's different than discussing gender roles which certainly have relevant history. But "taking care of your family" is a trait and women we expected to do that to. Just with different tasks. Same with being honest / honorable and just about any trait was practically speaking, non-gendered, but with gendered expressions of those traits.
I'd also say that if we don't try to change our language, then it will never change. If we don't immediately question questionable assertions, historically relevant or not, then it will never change. The best day to have questioned a definition of masculinity that isn't actually gender specific was thousands of years ago, the 2nd best day is today.
I will say I DO get what you are saying about history. It isn't lost on me how it has influenced cultural norms and language today. But I'm also saying that, ironically, if you isolate traits from expressions of those traits, even thousands of years ago I could make the same case that the traits weren't actually gendered if dissected.
I’m not who you’re replying to, but I feel the same way as them. Take what I quoted from you above and replace man/boy with woman/girl. How is it any different?
You're doing the same thing they did. You skipped the OTHER criteria I listed for being “manly” besides just “goodness”, that being: for a person that identifies with the biological reproductive role of a male.
Maturity isn’t gendered. Taking on adult responsibilities isn’t gendered
Agreed it isn't, but for a person that identifies with the biological reproductive role of a male, there is a specific term for it: "manly". Where did that come from? History.
With my explanation to that other poster, I'm more confused by your doubling down on it.
Here's what I'm saying "With X,Y, and Z it equals 'manly'"
You seem to be saying "Yes but if you remove X and Y, then why does the term 'manly' apply?". I agree with you, it no longer does. You're talking about something else at that point because you've removed characteristics that apply to the word "manly" so it no longer is that word.
I’d also say that if we don’t try to change our language, then it will never change. If we don’t immediately question questionable assertions, historically relevant or not, then it will never change.
No argument from me there. However it will be up to the very young generations growing up right now to change this. All the rest of us have grown up in a world of old definitions of masculinity. We can reject those and adopt the words, but we can't erase our knowledge of them. Most of the adult generations alive today will have to eventually die off for these ideas to disappear from our society.
I will say I DO get what you are saying about history. It isn’t lost on me how it has influenced cultural norms and language today. But I’m also saying that, ironically, if you isolate traits from expressions of those traits, even thousands of years ago I could make the same case that the traits weren’t actually gendered if dissected.
I disagree. One of those specific traits is a person that identifies with the biological reproductive role of a male. If that trait remains, it cannot be ungendered. If you remove that trait, you're not talking about the word 'manly' anymore.
I mean yeah, they should probably be ungendered, but in our society they still do get gendered. A lot of expectation is placed on men to be the kind of hard-working person that will work a 50 hour week, put food on the table, be a perfect and present father to their children and a dependable rock for their partner while being perfectly in control of their emotions themselves (and don't you even think about crying) and still have time to build a furnace and teach the eldest how to change a tire and have an active social life and work out and improve themselves and do all those other things that a normal person needs to do.
It's not good and it's not right, and it's not even what the OP was specifically talking about in the post, but that's why you'll see words like "strong", "dependable", "capable", etc thrown around in this thread a lot, because men like to feel that way because it feels like they've achieved at least some part of the frankly impossible image that's placed in young boy's heads of what a man should be.
I appreciate your breakdown. In other words, what you’re saying is that a man’s feeling of manliness is most often rooted in how closely he resembles societal expectations.
I think it’s pretty much the most reasonable explanation. But it still strikes me that men generally do not themselves think about it in those terms, and in fact consider it to be inherently emasculating. Masculinity viewed through this lens in essence becomes an act of submission to an outside force, which stands in contrast to many evident directives of masculinity such as independence and inherent drive.
Indeed the OP touches on this, implying that masculinity simply must be secured from within, with brazen disregard for the way others perceive you.
So if it does really come down to matching expectations, then it seems to be, as you said, frankly impossible
Yeah that's pretty much my thought as well. I don't seem to ever concern myself with "feeling" like a man, or even acting like one. I just act like who I am, and mostly concern myself with just trying to be a better human and I'm a long work in progress on that. But none of it is tied to some conscious sense of masculinity. I know the culture I was raised in certainly has an unconscious influence, but I can only effect those as I am made aware of them. For sure some of my worst traits are associated with maleness, but I don't consider them what makes me feel like a man when they come out, and for sure make me feel like an asshole. And we men and women both have assholes ;-)
That's a good question. I think most of the traits described here also apply to women, but as always, we're talking about overlapping Bell curves here. I think men derive their sense of self worth from things like strength, leadership and independence more so than women do on average. There's also traditionally feminine traits men derive self worth from, like empathy, affection and devotion. The same is probably true for women; little of column A, little of column B.
I don't think there's anything wrong with that, this is just how genders shake out on average, so the implication that a man shouldn't like feeling like one kind of bothers me.
I totally agree with your final thesis, it bothers me a lot too.
However, there's some nits I could pick with your construct of what drives men's (or women's) sense of self-worth as being part of the "bell curve". Meaning, that feeling of self-worth is itself derived from the culture they grow up in (read: imposed) and not some inherent trait that has been statistically examined and can be plotted on a bell curve (read: implicit).
I'd assert that the bell curves overlap 1 for 1 and that all "traits" being discussed are traits of a good person without respect to gender. Note: I'm not talking about physical traits, I'm just talking about traits of the mind and action. Emotional strength, women can and do have that. Strength of character, courage, leadership, independence, compassion, empathy, protectiveness, selflessness, charity, etc, these are all traits both genders can and ideally should objectively possess regardless if they've grown up being told otherwise. Even how those traits are made manifest are influenced by the society around them.
You didn't say it, but "Taking care of family" is the most laughable one I think I ever hear. Like, seriously? Women don't take care of their family? Aren't protective of their family? The only aspect of those that has any whiff of validity of being "masculine" is when it's associated with physical strength. But as a "trait", men have nothing on women for the societal expectations, and possibly the genetic "urge", to take care of their family. So I always just get a chuckle when someone lists taking care of family as something that defines being a man.
A lot of it is centered around achievement and feeling useful, so building or fixing something, physical activity, being seen as a provider etc.
It's why men with families etc take being made redundant quite badly, not being able to provide for your family can really make you feel like a failure.
That's also because we teach people that romantic relationships cannot be friendships. If your partner is your best friend then you aren't redundant, you're a power team.
FYI this isn't a term Americans know. I was super confused when I moved to the UK and kept hearing it mostly because people being made redundant weren't technically 'being made redundant', if anything they were already made redundant (or just no longer needed for some other reason, or no longer affordable) and were now suffering the consequences. Idk, weird phrase, I'm going to go look up the etymology now. To be fair I suppose 'laid off' is pretty weird too
When you take your shirt off, you lift something real heavy, open a beer without a bottlecap opener, and high five somebody and it hurts then you should be activating all the correct masculine endorphin triggers. A lot of it comes as a response from high testosterone hormone levels.
I don't know if it's gotten better these days, but back in the 90's "being a man" was more a definition of absence. Being a man was "not being a woman/girl."
This caused a couple years of real difficulty for me as a high school boy, since women were (finally) allowed to do all the "male" things, which ended up defining the male identity out of existence.
I feel like this perspective needs a bigger audience, since it explains a whole lot about the incel/alpha backlash, and the gender divide in U.S. politics.
I agree with some of the other answers you've received, but I want to add one.
I think there's a kind of impulsive confidence, and unmitigated determination that lets me put on shorts when it's 20 degrees Fahrenheit out, then tells me to stay the course, and accept that I have entirely become cold, rather than merely passing by it.
As for what other people can do to help me feel that feeling, I have no idea. I do those things because of the way that I am. People have already tried encouraging or discouraging me, and it hasn't changed how I prefer to dress (for example).
Being a stubborn old fool isn't just a "man" trait 😜
But I suppose, being statistically more risk tolerant is a sign of being a man. Not sure if that nature, nurture, or both I'm not going to speculate. But we are where we are however we got here.
I for one, am amazed I've made it this many trips around the sun.
Just waiting for the day when someone can explain to me what makes a man a man without describing skills, qualities, and actions that anyone can do regardless of gender.
And don't tell me it's "have a penis", because if that were true then effeminate men wouldn't be insulted all the time for not being "real" men, and there wouldn't be toxic masculinity.
Same question for women. Gender is only useful insofar as we decide it is. We have an inherent nature to categorize and differentiate, and in some cases that makes a lot of sense, but outside of strictly biological facts, that distinction between genders is nebulous at best.
Like religion, gender identity is personal, even if it stems from society. No two people will share the same opinion, it'd probably be weird if they did, and as long as they're not using their opinion as basis for fact, do whatever you want, man woman or anyone in between, outside, or around the spectrum.
Gender is a social construct that is, gladly, starting to fail.
I hope that in some years people would stop refering to having any gender, and they'll just have the social behavior they'd like best when they like it best. And will only discuss their sex when it's medically relevant.
Sadly unlikely because it's rooted in biological differences (mainly hormones), so on average there will be sex-based differences. I'd love it if people stopped stereotyping because of that but I doubt itll ever happen. Maybe we can at least get rid of the idea of gendered hobbies and such, but even then most people want to identify as part of a group so there will likely always be some association.
It's less that the social construct is failing, and more that we're finally letting it flourish.
Tying the way you present to the world to one of two options often linked to your gonads is extremely limiting. What you describe isn't the failure of gender, it's an explosion of genders.
Idk, but i feel like it's just being who you are and respecting yourself.
Same as a woman being a woman.
Anyone that's confident in who they are isn't going to care or announce it.
All the blustering either way is just yelling "im a grown ass man/woman!" outside of a grocery store at 1 am.
More in general, it's not up to others to change the way they act to feed somebody else's self-delusions of having some kind of quality they do not have.
I've actually had to deal with something somewhat parallel to this when I moved from The Netherlands (whose people are known for being blunt) to Britain (were everything is sugarcoated and people are evasive, the higher the social class the worst it gets) and then proceeded to go around unknowingly insulting just about every insecure person I met in that place by giving them my blunt opinion on what they cared about, without evasiveness or sugarcoating.
The balance I found was to stop giving my opinion unless asked and if asked by somebody who didn't know my ways yet, give them a notice ("I used to live in The Netherlands so just point out ways in which things can be improved, but that doesn't mean I think they're bad") and then proceed to give them my blunt opinion.
Why is that the direction you're taking this? Have you not once noticed how women have a whole set of unspoken rules and shit that you gotta do to be part of their show?
Lots of women do this, mostly very young ones with fresh naive boyfriends but its definitely not unheard of for a woman to act that way. Not that that excuses the men who behave like this also.
I once got told off by a woman in The Netherlands (to were I had immigrated from my native Portugal) for holding the door open for her and had to explain that it wasn't for her, it was because it made me feel good to be helpful and I did it for both men and women (if you've already gone to the trouble of openning the door, might as well keep it open for somebody who is just behind you).
I just found it funny how a cultural habit from somewhere else that wasn't even gender specific got interpreted as macho posturing.
Traditionally, societal opionions of how a woman should be involved her making herself appealing to men before married and submissive to her husband afterwards.
I would even say that "a man needs to feel like a man" and "a woman needs to feel like a woman" are two sides of the same original coin - it's just that in modern days the latter is frowned upon much more (though, sadly, a lot of people still go around with an interiorized version of it) than the former.
Yeah, whenever anybody talks like this, I just assume they're talking about traditional gender roles. So, "a woman needs to feel like a woman" gives me the ick, too.
Yeah, and they really need extreme effort to cater to. Maybe it just doesn't come so naturally for me in the spectrum, but it feels like a whole awful game balancing act that exists to let the other person think they're in charge.
I do do traditional man things: woodworking, maintenance on the family vehicles, and I’ve been thinking of getting into machining as a hobby because I have a lot of hand-me-down yard equipment that’s showing its age and I might need to start making my own parts because eBay is looking kind of barren.
Anyway, none of these activities have ever made me feel “manly” I never understood what that means. I feel like myself doing either something I enjoy, or something that needs to be done. My wife always says that she likes that she married such a manly guy who can fix all this stuff and make furniture, but anyone with functioning hands and a brain can do this stuff, it’s not exactly hard. Having a penis doesn’t make you an expert carpenter or mediocre mechanic, working with wood and old engines does that.
I know you're joking, but I don't get people who unironically think like this. Like whats preventing a woman from eating lots of meat and losing money on sports betting? Like what physical barrier prevents them from doing that? None.
Societal expectations. If enough people think it does then it does. Doesn't mean non-men can't do it, but they might get ostracized for it, just like men are when they do certain female-coded things. Why is blue for boys and pink for girls? Why are high-heels for women only? Doesn't have to make any actual sense, it just kinda is right now, even though it wasn't always the case.
It's all society. Always has been. Always will be. There are some very specific biological differences in the two sexes, and we've used those real differences to decide a bunch of fake differences we stick to out of convention. There's an idea of what a man is in our collective unconscious, an archetypal "man", and that's what people refer to, but that archetype is breaking down. Man, woman, gender in general. We're realizing that those distinctions aren't useful, and sometimes, maybe even most of the time, are detrimental.
That all said, humans are social creatures. That pressure, that idea of "man" is all around us. It's absolutely understandable that people can still generalize what "man" is. The concept doesn't have to be based on anything tangible to be relevant to our species.
Most 'man' things make me feel awkward and uncomfortable. Even when I was a kid. Other boys would wrestle and push each other around and stuff and I was like, "yeah, don't involve me in this."
And yet I have never been insecure about my gender. I'm fine being a man who isn't "traditionally" male.
Only if you're completely unwilling to unpack what things like "be a man" and "like a man" generally mean in the anglosphere, and how phrases like that have often been employed to reinforce the worst and most destructive aspects of masculinity.
Is this a real thing? I don't believe I've ever encountered this. I suspect they're actually being demeaning to men in general, or men who don't fit their idea of masculinity. I've encountered people like that. Though the opposite is more common (men, and women, demeaning women who don't fit their idea of what a woman should be like, or just demeaning women in general).
LOL! Almost that exact phrase is what I use whenever my wife asks me why I'm peeing outside in my backyard instead of just going inside to the bathroom.
I've never heard anyone say that phrase, is it possible that people use that expression to mean "a man likes to feel like a man... not a machine"? Ie he has thoughts, emotions, and priorities. He is not a commodity, his worth is more than just profit he can produce.
Not that women don't also have those attributes, just that "man" is being used as an outdated shorthand for humanity.
I'm not sure how i feel about the post altogether. I mean, i understand that toxic masculinity is bad, but this post needs some assumptions and context to make me want to side with it. For example, if I saw some guy just kinda minding his business doing silly guy stuff and the context was he wants to "feel like a man," i don't think i would be offended or concerned?
I've heard this one before from my conservative grandma, It's when a girl is doing something manly that the guy ""should"" be doing. Like if a girl is carrying in all the groceries while a guy is just watching someone would say "let [guy] do it, he's supposed to feel like a man"
This came up a lot as my sister is very much a 'do it yourself' kinda gal whereas her (now ex) boyfriend wasn't much of an initiative taker.
It's not about a guy not doing manly things, it's about stopping women from doing manly things.
(also note I'm using 'manly' in the stereotypical terms, not how I personally see them)
Again, that's added context. I don't know how feeling like a man is stopping a women from anything. I don't think that's a necessary component of the statement at all, though i appreciate the reply
It's hard to tell from the context, but it felt to me more like something a right-wing guy with really unrealistic expectations says to their soon to be ex-girlfriend (or possibly to the fiance in the marriage the church arranged) about how they need to be the one in charge.
Yeah I think we should believe that the witness correctly interpreted the meaning in the given context, but we shouldn't assume that everyone that says it means it like that. It's context dependant.
It's not "patriarchy", it's the collective of the social norms and pressures put in place by, perpetrated by, and maintained by, the majority of both sexes. The word implies it's males' fault society is the way it is, which is demonstrably bullshit.
I mean... No? I dont see where it would imply that its men fault. The word mean that men rule.
The ODE define it by "a society, system, or country that is ruled or controlled by men"
And the argument that both gender (sexes may not be the best word for what you were trying to say) are maintaining the system hold some truth,
But you can t deny that men did vote in favour of the rapist in the last US election , or that it is men that are leading a war against feminism in Skorea.
I mean… No? I dont see where it would imply that its men fault. The word mean that men rule.
But they don't. Which is my point--people like you assert this is the case, so that when stuff is shitty, you can say things like 'well, the men are in charge, so if it's bad, it's men's fault', and in turn imply that women have zero agency in society and exist as nothing more than victims. You seem not to realize how deeply misogynistic it is to infantilize women this way, not to mention misandrist as well.
99.9% of men have no 'ruling' power whatsoever--they're in the weeds right alongside the 99.9% of women who also don't. To categorize either sex as 'the ruler' in American or any Western society is absolutely ridiculous.
But you can t deny that men did vote in favour of the rapist in the last US election
The majority of US voters are women. If all of the women voted for the same candidate, that candidate would be guaranteed to win, every time.
But all of the women didn't do that, did they? Well, guess what? Neither did all of the men.
Well over thirty million women voted for Trump. Stop stereotyping the sexes and acting like they're hiveminds, it's plainly sexist bullshit.
Face it: the blame for any societal ill does not belong to one sex.
because its not only men perpetuating this shit, some just put up with it and guide younger women on how to gently move things along and the flimsy little dude forgets and gets mad about the next dumb thing. Literally my parents...
If that's the role-play you need from your partner and she agrees to it and you reciprocate; then sure. But it isn't society's, or your co-workers', job to do that.
As a biological male and someone who identifies as a man, it's pretty weak, IMO, to need someone else to make you feel a particular way.
Are you in control of your feelings, or do you constantly need someone else to reinforce, or induce a feeling in you?
Personally, I'm in control of my feelings, and bluntly, nobody else has control over me. Neither for how I feel, or what I think/do; with the only exception to what I do being governed in part by legality. Eg. If I know a thing isn't legal to do, then I won't do that thing. Beyond the rule of law, I do, think, say, and feel, whatever, and however I want.
To me, having that much control over my own self is what makes me a person living in a free country. Anyone who does not have the ability, like I do, to think, feel, do, and love, whomever and, whatever they want, is someone who I want to support in gaining that right.
This seems ...um.. naive. I love my wife and her opinion of me affects my feelings. And the more I care about my wife, the more I love her, the more her opinion of me matters. Humans are social creatures and we look for positive feedback from the people we care most about. To pretend like this doesn't matter is silly.
People we care about should be people we care to make happy, and who we want to make us happy.
I'm speaking more about agency. I use my own agency to limit whose opinion can even move the needle to my emotions. I decide whether their comments are something I should "take to heart" or disregard as an outburst.
Personally I separate myself from most situations and emotional involvement and look at things from a neutral, logical standpoint before I allow myself and my own feelings to be affected by what may, or may not be said in the moment.
I don't need anyone to do anything to make me feel happy, or like a man. I control that. I'm not going to blame anyone for how I feel.
If you don't feel happy, or you don't "feel like a man" (whatever that means to you), the answers to why you feel that way, or how you inspire those feelings in yourself are entirely within your power to control. You have agency over your feelings.
My SO, when she compliments me, makes me feel good, but I don't need her to constantly placate me with compliments in order to feel valuable, appreciated, happy, or "like a man".
It is emotionally healthy to look inward for happiness and satisfaction. Relying on the acceptance and platitudes from others to feel okay is codependent. I don't understand why anyone would want to give their agency over their feelings and emotions, wholly and completely over to others.
The idea of controlling your feelings seems laughable. If you have control they aren't feelings, just thoughts. You cant really control thoughts either, just control what you do with them. Except we know that humans in general don't have great control of our actions either. We just have to live in this comfortable little lie where we have control over ourselves despite all evidence to the contrary in order to maintain a remotely reasonable society, but it's not real any more than your belief that you control your feelings.
While I don't think anyone has complete control of their own emotions, I do think some measure of control is possible through manipulation of one's own facial expression, posture, breathing & thought patterns.
Right you can hack your lizard brain with deep breathing to calm yourself down, but that seems like even more proof the you you think you are is only barely in charge of this mess we call a brain. If you can't calm down you can trick your body into calming down which then calms "you" down. Personally I tend to think the you you are is just a verbal processing system that retroactively analyzes what the rest of your brain does. If the reaction is slow enough, you can sometimes take charge and we call that modicum of authority "self control".
The whole microexpression thing, if valid, takes the facial expressions thing off the table.
Posture is...I guess controllable as a bulk coordinated muscle movement but tbh no clue why that's relevant.
Personally I tend to think the you you are is just a verbal processing system that retroactively analyzes what the rest of your brain does.
I seem to remember reading that research of certain brain disorders has shown exactly that... Basically, without a functional corpus callosum, one side of your brain does something, then the other side (that had nothing to do with it) comes up with a reason why "it" did it.
There's a saying that stuck with me: "feelings are never wrong".
Your feelings are a fact of your continued human existence. Unless you're a psychopath or sociopath (or whatever) and you literally don't feel, your feelings simply are.
From there I determined that feelings can be inspired incorrectly from a given happenstance. While you may initially feel offended by something that is said, it's neither necessary to continue being offended, nor is it necessary to always have that reaction to that given happenstance. Accepting yourself as you are is vitally important in restructuring who you want to be.
This is all borderline cognitive behavioural therapy. Training yourself to be the best version of you that you can be. I've been dabbling in CBT techniques for most of my life. I wasn't aware that it was CBT when I started working on myself in this capacity, but I've recently learned that a lot of the techniques I've been using to better myself, and increase my agency and control over my own mind and emotions, is used in CBT.
I would agree that some thoughts are not controllable. We all get intrusive thoughts and impulses that we choose whether we want to act on them. Whether that action is to open your mouth and speak those thoughts aloud, or type them out, or to take action based on those thoughts.
The thoughts and actions you describe I understand to be system 1 thinking. Aka, thinking fast. There's a great book on this called "thinking: fast and slow" which covers the ideas. Basically system 1 is your "fast" thinking, heuristic/instinctual/"muscle memory" systems. It's your "knee jerk" reactions and your first thought on something. System 2 is your contemplative and analytical systems, aka, "thinking slow".
System 2 can educate system 1, which is how we form habits and "muscle memory"
System 1, we have little immediate control over since the majority of our sapience is fully embedded in system 2.
I would agree that there's a nontrivial number of people going around under only the learned behaviors from system 1, and doing very little analysis of what's happening by utilizing system 2.
If I may ask, did you feel the need to post this because you felt that I was portraying the opposite, or are you building on the point?
I'm hoping it's the latter, but if it's the former, please tell me what I said that made you feel that way. I'm always trying to improve my communication.
I would absolutely rather fall victim to a debate fallacy rather than blatant bigotry. The original commentor is absolutely a bigot by their own admission, however my logical extension of their broadcasting their own bigotry doesn't necessarily fall into an ad hominem attack. All I ever said was that the original commentor was arguing in bad faith.
You absolutely did fall into an ad hominem attack by putting words in my mouth. I never attempted to negate their assertion, address their assertion, or even summarize their assertion. I simply said their assertion was made in bad faith.
Normalize feeling like a man as somebody who is given space to feel anything beyond anger or shame. A man needs to feel like he can talk about things on his mind at any given time, to anybody he trusts. A man is somebody who can cry when he is hurting, and it be okay; that he won’t be labeled as weak or a coward.
That’s the entire point. Traditionally, men are not treated like a human being. They are expected to be something else entirely, and it’s both not fair and infeasible.
Mine puts up with my dad jokes and tell me I look handsome when Im all gross and covered in dirt after a long day working outside. That's more than enough for me.
When I come in sore and cold from shoveling the latest buttload of snow and she tells the kids to go cuddle daddy and warm me up? Yeah that makes me feel pretty good.
Contrary to what some people claim, a lot of women do find men attractive that can get themselves dirty and are crafty. That is, if it doesn't come with manners like a cavemen.
This whole “like a man” thing sounds to me like an extension of the toxic cultural BS where “men” are not just humans with emotions and needs like every other human. It reeks of men who are too scared or ignorant to be self-aware and figure out what life really means to them, and thus they need the people around them (especially the partners) to play along in their power/masculinity fantasy.
What a man needs is to realize he’s just another human, and that for humans happiness and fulfillment can ultimately only come from within. Relationships with others are crucial, and you might even need some medication to get your brain chemistry unfucked, but neither of those are independently going to make you happy with yourself and “feel like a man.”
“A man” can refer to roughly half the adult population. It’s not exactly an exclusive club. Why not leave gender out if it and try to be “a good person” and see where that gets you?
Having the people around you walking on eggshells to keep your manly ego intact, whether it’s out of fear or pity, is the exact opposite of what a good person should strive for. What if the people around you instead trust you, feel safe with you, laugh with you, and are better off with you in their lives?
Source: Am man. Went through some stuff. Figured some things out. Made some things better. Have wife and child who enjoy life.
No. That's just what makes a good person. Pretty much the same with every other "Being a man means yadda yadda yadda" I've ever heard so far. Every time, what follows are a list of qualities that make a good person/human, and are neither exclusive to men, nor counterfactual for women. To think otherwise would be to imply that women don't/can't/shouldn't possess those qualities (I'm not saying you thought otherwise Hadriscus; I'm just taking my thought to the next logical step).
I don't have a satisfying answer for what "makes a man" because I reject the entire concept that there is any list of qualities of what makes a [gender]; or that one is even needed. The closest could be a pair of testicles (per Laser's reply), but then we'd enter into a trans debate and frankly I support trans-rights.
Or to really sum it all up, the entire debate is just a bunch of gatekeeping and social identity politics ("man" and "woman" both) that really is just stupid and counterproductive to us all getting along.
What's wrong with wanting to feel like a man? There's nothing inherently negative about that. I like providing for my wife and I want nothing in return. I like doing typical man stuff with my friends. Why does that make you feel like I'm trying to be superior to anyone? I am comfortable in my masculinity and so should anyone who wants to be, stop treating that as toxic.
edit: Express your opinion by downvoting me if you must, but do me the courtesy of answering the question.
No it doesn't. It shows a woman imagining things that weren't said, which is then responded to with an anecdote.
edit: Yeah I guess I'm wrong here. The second post does talk about that. Still, I don't think 'A man likes to feel like a man' implies anyone needs to do anything to accommodate.
how is that implied by 'a man likes to feel like a man'?
What's the context that you're imagining this topic coming up? Because from my perspective, as a man, if someone said this to me about someone else I'd assume that I'm being asked to come up with some made up work, so that some junior guy on my team, or some dude in my social group who is feeling down, can feel more useful.
Which I might or might not accommodate, but it's kinda patronizing and would effectively have the opposite effect in building up my respect for that man.
I'm not imagining any context, I am taking the statement at face value. I am a man, and I like to behave in a way that makes me feel like it. Like mentioned elsewhere in this thread, that means feeling useful, it means being relied upon by others, it means honouring the responsibilities I have towards others.
But you need to imagine a context, or there's no conversation to be had because it makes now sense in a vacuum. In what world does anyone just say something like, "A man likes to feel like a man" without context?
You provided your own context which generally is about what you do for yourself. Though I'm slightly skeptical that you choose to do those things specifically in the context of "today I want to do something for myself that makes me feel like a man". You just do the things you like; full stop. But if I'm wrong, you do you, no judgement or kink-shaming ;-) I kid!
So in the more general context of debating what it means when someone says "A man likes to feel like a man" you have to wonder what drove them to say it and to whom. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume it was said in response to someone doing/not doing, or approving/disapproving of something the speaker associates with feeling like a man. And with that very generic context one has to ask, why is it someone else's responsibility to do/not do something to make someone feel like a man? And why does anyone's approval/disapproval impact someone else's sense of masculinity?
As for feeling useful, being relied upon, honouring responsibilities, how are those traits of being a man? I ask that in the context of, how are they not just traits of a good person. When someone doesn't do those things that doesn't make them not a man, it makes them not a good person full stop.
I feel for this post because I've been told by bosses that men aren't used to people like me. They'd get used to it if women weren't told to dumb themselves down for the poor boys raised on some fabricated ideal of manliness. I don't like to think of traits or talents being gendered because it's exclusionary.
When I go in to buy computer parts I still get asked if I'm sure that's what my boyfriend wants? I never mention a boyfriend, they just assume. I don't ask for help in hardware stores because nine times out of ten it's gonna start a whole argument with someone who thinks they know my project better than I do.
I see the same thing happening to guys, saw a dude at a yarn shop get asked if he was gettin supplies for his wife. That sucks, right? It sucks to feel less like who you are because of what you like. That shit keeps up the gender divide because not everyone has the energy to risk feeling a little worse to do the things they enjoy.
So yeah, I'll never describe an activity as typically male or female.
As it turns out, the things that make a good man are the same things that make a good person.
I love cooking and baking. Whenever there's a family get together I try to make something whether it's a full dish or some sweet bread for desert.
None of the other guys have ever complimented me on any if it, they all compliment my wife on 'her' delicious food. She corrects them and they say nothing, it turns into a weird situation for some reason and it seems like they're embarrassed to admit they like something made by a man? It's weird
The toxic masculinity on my wife's side is absolutely crazy and really sad.
That sucks. Hard to be yourself around people when navigating their fragile beliefs is like playing epistemological fiddlesticks. Weird when most executive chefs are male.
I donno the answer. Make 'em some pink sparkle shortbread infused with whiskey and bacon and watch their minds implode.
I won’t bore you with repetition so I’ll just link.
I think we mostly agree, doing the stuff you want to do in life should not be stifled by your gender. But in the OP and in this thread I get the feeling that “a man likes to feel like a man” automatically carries with it the implication that others should accommodate (by for example dumbing themselves down in order not to damage fragile masculinity as you said). I don’t see that implication at all. Is there some cultural context I’m missing here? Is this something you would say in a context where fragile masculinity is in danger of being harmed?
The last question is a leading one and poorly framed, so I won't answer it. This is a thread about two comments on a discussion, we don't know the context of what came before or any relationship these two people had.
But yeah, in my circles of women who are just fucking tired, we've all been told we gotta let men be men, and that's somehow our responsibility. So that's the context, we hear that phrase in a different tone than men do.
Geekandmisandry. Misandry ie. someone who hates men.
Well at least you're open about it. Many aren't when they attack men.
Here's the thing about "toxic masculinity". Some people are toxic. Women and men tend to express that toxicity in different ways. Attacking an entire gender for the behaviour of the worst is stereotyping.
More broadly it's part of the modern notion that we are on teams and that the other team is bad.
Of course both men and women can be toxic. The point of toxic masculinity as a term is to draw attention to the fact that there's a certain brand of toxicity that has much more harmful outcomes in male-dominated spaces, for a variety of social and cultural reasons. It tends to be a rather controversial term mostly because it gets conflated with the idea that masculinity itself is toxic (which is not what it's supposed to mean).
The discussion should be about the magnitude of the problem, not hand-waving it away because women do it too but in different ways. The "different ways" is kind of the whole point of the argument.
Also, that's a lot of extrapolation you did simply from a username in a screenshot. Would you describe any of their actual words in the post as misandrist?
I mean, it pretty clearly implies "feeling like a man" is only a bad thing. That "feeling like a man" can only be done in ways that make others feel inferior. That seems pretty misandrous. to me. Enough to call misandry right away? No. But between that and the name, they're starting to set a theme.
I got the impression that it's fine for a man to "feel like a man" but that that needs to be something he finds on his own terms, and needs to come from within. It's not something he gets to impose upon others, such that it demands their cooperation or subordination. If to anyone, masculinity requires them being superior to others... maybe they need to do some soul searching.
Perhaps the user's name does contribute to a theme. I don't see anything specifically wrong with what was mentioned in this post, but we would need more context to determine who's in the wrong, Reddit AITA style.
Is respecting someone as a human really being subservient? Or is someone strutting around demanding respect for who one is, really just demanding everyone else to be subservient?
Did you really make an account just to post Facebook-tier self-help nonsense? With all the emoji spam, I bet it actually was copy/pasted off of Facebook. Get out of here.
Strong people build others up. Weak people knock them down to feel big. You want to feel like a strong man? Protect others and be generous with your spirit.
Fucking this. Strong men—strong people—help others. Healthy or not, realistic or not, this is the message that’s been sold to us since time immemorial. The knight that slays the dragon and saves the kingdom. The alien that crash lands and moonlights as a superhero. The sled dog runs 261 miles to bring the medicine to a town beset by an epidemic.
Yes, sure, one can argue some romanticism (or propaganda) with any given example. But the overall message of heroism, of strength, is not one of selfishness or of “me and mine”.
Heroism is something we ought to focus more on as a culture in general. Doing things simply because they are right and protecting others who cannot protect themselves cannot be understated.
I think a challenge with “right” is that it is subjective. For example, there are people today who believe that doing what’s “right” entails doing things that hurt people, or deprive them of happiness, or even a future. Or, that doing what’s “right” means only helping your family or your friends or your church or your Elks club.
I would say heroism has plenty of cultural emphasis already, perhaps too much even. The prevalence of superhero movies, calling anyone who served in the military a hero, all of the nurses/caregivers/essential workers during covid: there are so many examples of loud proclamations of heroism in US/Anglo culture. It is clearly a value held by the vast majority of people.
I think instead we should be looking at the messages people are actually getting from all the hero worship, rather than what we think are the important take-aways. Things like exceptionalism, having strength to prevail against one's enemies, making hard decisions for "the greater good". Finding good stories to combat these potentially damaging and counterproductive ideas is where we should be focusing our cultural energies IMO, rather than more hero worship.
Semi-related, as this reminded me of a quote from Cary Grant:
This was then repurposed on Star Trek Strange New Worlds by chief engineer Pelia (from a species that lives several centuries):
Hah, didn't catch that when I saw the episode - Pelia knew Cary Grant!
How to really feel like a man
Yeah, first time hearing "a man wants to feel like a man"
My first interpretation was a bunch of guys fighting with sticks and everyone having a blast
Sometimes you find a really great stick. I've got one on my porch right now.
Are you male? The phrase is primarily said to women which might be why you're unfamiliar with it if so.
There are fun casual LARP or Nerf groups all over the place. Most of them would love to have more people coming out to the park on the weekend. Bring friends, or make some while you're there!
You just fell on the first hurdle
You:
A patient I dealt with had schizophrenia and dementia, "but I'm a man, not a little girl with panties" was his counterargument to everything.
You can only have one cigarette at a time because otherwise you lose them all and run out. "But I'm a man."
You know the doctor says your food needs to be cut up. "Do I look like a little girl to you?"
That's the communal cheese bowl, this is your plate. You can't eat from the communal cheese bowl with a fork. "Do you see me wearing panties?"
Whenever I hear people making these kind of gender essentialist arguments, they just sound pitiably out of touch with reality to me.
In my head I made many cutting remarks. But the reality of this level of cognitive decline is like 90% miserably depressing and only like 10% infuriating. Plus he wouldn't be capable of understanding the criticism anyway.
That's potentially worthwhile with someone who is cognizant but just an asshole. For someone with dementia, there's no point
I don't know what it says about you if you do it deliberately but I think there's a lot to say for asking the question anyways because his speech filters don't work properly and he might not be able to censor himself.
If Men want to feel like Men then they have ways to deal with their insecurity:
Redo their own plumbing, twice. Once to change things and again to fix the problem they caused.
Chop firewood.
Build a furnace that you're only going to use like 4 times, ever.
50 pushups. If not reaching it makes you sad, start skipping numbers.
I'm in this comment and I don't like it.
Similarly there is an old adage that a home plumbing repair will take three trips to the hardware store.
This also describes me.
Plumbing is the one thing I won't do myself in diy. If screw ups are made I want the responsible party to fix things, and I don't want to be that party.
Add electrical to that list, because I'm not a fucking wizard, and electricity is magic.
With the plumbing example, the first time was a training exercise and doesn't count.
I met a marine mechanic once - he fixed Argos afterwards, which is how I met him. His saying:
One [nut] for me, one for the bilge.
Thank you to everyone in this thread who made me feel part of a community of my peers online for the first time, in a long time.
Every plumbing project (even yesterdays quick upgrade of the kitchen faucet) is at least a 2 tripper. Each time I finish one I swear I'm never moving again. Then, 5 years later, I'm fixing the previous owners mishaps "one last time".
To all the people who've bought houses I lived in, I'm sorry for all of the " what was that idiot thinking" moments I've caused you. Ha
Hmm from what you said it's more like, "Yup, I can see what shit the last guy had to fix. Thanks friend I'll never meet."
I'll take that perspective! Cheers
Argos is still frustrating at times, he did not succeed.
If not reaching it makes you sad,
start skipping numbersforgive yourself and repeat tomorrow. You'll feel awesome when you get there.NO. THATS NOT MANLY ENOUGH. REAL MEN GIVE THEMSELVES THE AUTHORITY TO SKIP NUMBERS.
No! Perfection every time! Especially the first time.
Just change King to also say man.
So a trans person saying that he is a man, is not a real man? Or more adapted to context, a trans person saying that he wants to feel like a man, is not a real man? and doesn't deserve to feel like a man?
I don't agree with that at all. Weird thing to upvote tbh.
Edit: Today I learned, when I advocate for trans rights, I get up votes. When I apply the same support to cis men, I get down voted.
I thought this is a supportive space in terms of gender identity. I guess I was wrong. I will continue to support trans people for the same reasons, I support everyone. Human rights.
I'd say it's rather that a trans person shouldn't prove anything to anyone, same as cis. If they feel the need to prove, that's likely because of influence of toxic gender standards
Well I don't know where you read the proving part. it is about feeling like a gender, not proving that you are. If you want to change topics, sure, we can talk about a different topic. Do you like Chinese food?
Yes, I do. I also do think that you were also reading what wasn't in the thread starter's post
It is the logical conclusion of comment. Trans men are men. Unless you want to argue that they aren't. Or that the men in the comments were implied to be cis men and then want to argue that cis and trans people should be treated differently to each other and therefore a trans man have every right to want to feel like a man but a cis man doesn't.
No, why?
Yes. And to be men the don't need to say that. Visibility is another thing, and in that regard one might argue that they need, but I think that increasing trans visibility is not the same as 'I am man' statements
Edit:
To this I would also say 'No', but I'm starting to guess, we have a very different views on what it is to 'feel like a man'
Okay the post talks about "needing to feel like a man". (I am ignoring The comment on the picture because that is not what my issue is. My issue is the general statement in the post of the "aunt" in the picture and The comment section here) The comment is a reaction gifs and I think you agree that maybe you shouldn't take reaction gifs 100% literally without any adaption to the context. Here the context is men FEELING manly. So I think it is fair to understand it as "if you have to say that you want to feel manly, you aren't"
In that context, you can't remove looking like a man, or maybe doing stereotypical man stuff, or anything that makes that person feel manly. The questions are, of course, what the fuck do you need to feel manly? What causes you to say that? What are you requiring?
All Women need to submit to you? Well that is completely unreasonable and you are an idiot. Not wanting to have your living room painted in pink, rather reasonable.
I heavily reject the notion that you or me get to decide what makes someone feel manly. If it is something that would require something from someone else, Of course, there are reasonable requests and unreasonable requests. And you can reject to fulfill them, you can even mock them if you want, but they aren't less of a man for wanting to feel like one and painting that desire with a broad brush like in aunt's post is also pretty bad (and probably sexist)
Maybe we have a different view on what it is to feel like a man. But if that is the case, then tell me, why are we judging men for expressing that they want to feel like a man without asking them what the fuck they mean? Because we would mean different things, so why wouldn't they mean something else than you or me?
The reason you're getting downvoted is because you seem to be missing the point of the meme and then are getting argumentative.
What is the point of the meme? How is it not ridiculing/dismissing the desire of a man to feel manly? Something that rightfully usually finds support here for trans man.
Because it's not ridiculing someone for feeling manly, it's ridiculing the kind of person that goes around stating they're manly as fuck all the time, going out of their way to show how manly they are and generally making "manliness" their entire personality.
Where does it say that?
The post in the picture, just completely dismiss any possibility other than a man wanting to feel superior.
That is the starting point, that is what I am talking about.
The comment in the picture provides us with a story and context but it is not the same story or context because it is a different user sharing their experience. I have no issue with that.
The reaction gif is implying that you aren't a man if you express that you want to feel like one.
Where does it say that you say it says? Where does it state that it is about making it your entire personality? Where does it say, it is about people who want to show how manly they? Where does it state that they don't like a man stating that they are so manly? It seems to be about the opposite. A man who struggles with feeling manly. Where does it state that it is something the person does all the time?
Some of these are inconsequential in some scenarios but all of them highlight how much you read in there that just is not present to justify toxic language and behavior.
Doesn't say that anywhere on the gif
You are correct, technically it doesn't. It is about kings, and the poster tells you to replace king with man.
Also technically it is saying that a trans person who tells you that they are a man, is not a real man. I mean trans men are men.
But I don't think that is a fair reading of the text. But sure you can read the message that I call toxic, as a toxic message to men in general and especially towards trans men. I just don't see where you want to go with that.
Alternatively, and admittedly, I am reading it in the context of the post in which it is about men expressing that they want to feel manly. Still toxic, and implicitly transphobic, but at least matching the post.
Why is it you're allowed to infer things the meme doesn't say but I'm not?
What am I infer that it doesn't say? I am willing to give that point up if you can make your case.
This place can be supportive of trans rights and also downvote bad logic and arguments.
Trans men don't "want to feel like a man". They are trans specifically because they already feel like a man.
In addition, your comment was a total non sequitur. We were talking about the fragile egos of certain cis men, and you brought up trans men. And did so in a way that makes you look like you're trying to be offended.
You seem like a good person. Please keep up the fight, but pick your battles a little more wisely.
A trans man feels like a man but before at least social transition, they probably don't feel like a man, in the sense that we have been talking about it. Which is why they transition.
It is ridiculous to read this and misunderstand what kind of "feeling like a man" we have been talking about.
I am Talking about trans men because 1. They are men. We talked about men. 2. It is bs, to act like you understand why a trans man wants to social transition but give shit to any (apparently cis) men when they want to have their gender affirmed.
Yes there are toxic men who expect ridiculous things from other people to feel affirmed, and often they are toxic. But this whole conversation is generalizations over generalization to toxic stereotypes. I am highlighting how much bs that is. Fucking treat people as individuals. If they want to meet their boys for a beer and discussing how the process of their different projects is going and what they might be able to do, to feel "manly", then why do you have to be toxic to them? How does that make them insecure? Is my mother insecure when she goes to a girls night?
People should fucking chill and if they want to judge people, be precise. Could you imagine how much the "immigrants are bad" folks would suffer if they had to be precise and explain to the class how their coworker is a good person and hard worker while being an immigrant, but all immigrants are lazy and criminal.
I am sick of the left copying right wing rhetoric. People are individuals and most of them are pretty cool.
So Where was my logic bad? Did we talk about fragile egos? No. We talked about a vague notion of men (not only cis) wanting to feel manly.
I'm stumped at the simple task of trying to imagine what does imply to "feel like a man".
You listen to Shania Twain’s hit Man! I Feel Like A Woman backwards
Women's shirts and long skirts
One might consider a blouse and kilt at least somewhat manly
A guy wearing it properly wears it with no underwear, which given the temperatures up there in Scotland means he's quite literally a man with cold hard balls.
100% guy here, real man feel is when others can rely on me, when I can help, that kind of stuff. Not “big car hurr durr bbq male superyorr” and the likes.
I agree with you, but there’s no reason bbq needs to catch these strays.
Even trucks are great if you're using them to help people move stuff. No comment on the pavement princesses with bigger cabs than beds.
Pavement princess is getting added to the lexicon. That’s amazing.
I feel like a man when I know I've met all of my responsibilities to myself and the ones I care about, and that I've moved the world even an infinitesimally small way forward to help the others in it. This means lending a hand or an ear to those that need it either with my labor or my mind (or many time both).
I hope others have something close to this definition, but realistically I don't think its common.
I guess what confuses me about all of this is why these things are in any way manly?
Like being reliable and following through on your commitments. Is it masculine when someone who isn’t a man is like that?
Or if I’m told someone is manly, have I now learned that he is in fact dependable?
I don’t mean to try and excessively pick apart what you’re saying, it’s just something I’ve always really struggled with understanding. People always seem to say things that strike me as being ungendered character traits when they’re asked about their gender.
I think I see the issue you're encountering with the perspective you're communicating.
You're looking for things that are exclusively masculine. Besides the role in physical biological reproduction, I don't think there is anything exclusively masculine by that measure.
The traits I listed could absolutely apply to people that are not men. However, the phrase "manly" is referring to societal measures not biological reproductive process abilities. If we distill that down further for this conversation, "manly" translates to "being worthy of respect". We could dissect why "manly" translates to "being worthy of respect", but that's a tangent from your question.
Ergo, for a person that identifies with the biological reproductive role of a male, and would like to be seeing as being worthy of respect in society, then they should have favorable societal traits and behaviors, in my opinion, such as those I listed.
I think this pretty much gets to the root of the friction I experience when this topic comes up. I wouldn’t mind digging into it.
You likely have already guessed that I would think of it this way, but isn’t it just that “good people are worthy of respect”? Because it seems to me like if you try hard to take care of your family and do right by others, you’re a good person deserving of respect.
You know what I mean? If there’s no need for the trait to be exclusively masculine, then why do we do it? Translate “manly” into “worthy of respect”, that is. Is there some benefit to thinking about it in terms of masculinity rather than just in terms of goodness?
Also, I do acknowledge this side of things. I wrote some thoughts about it in a reply to another comment in this thread, if you want to check that out. It’s an important point, and I don’t want you to think i’m just ignoring it. In summary, I think it’s kind of a bummer if in the end, manliness is just a tradition people feel compelled to participate in
You skipped the OTHER criteria I listed for being "manly" besides just "goodness", that being: for a person that identifies with the biological reproductive role of a male.
I'm not sure, but I think you're hearing the "man" in "manly" and assuming the opposite would "woman", "gay", or "enby". Not the case. The opposite to "man" in this case is "boy".
Its the "man" vs "boy" part, as in, a sign of maturity, of coming of age where you stop being a young and selfish boy and can see where you are in the world and what responsibilities you have to yourself and those around you in society. Society has few expectations of responsibility for a "boy". Responsibilities with weight go to those with maturity. Mature boys being men. Even the phrase "man up" usually means "to stand up and face the challenge instead of shying away", or to take responsibility. A boy still be 40 years old if he doesn't take up his adult responsibilities. At 40 years old he still wouldn't be "manly".
If you are taking exception with these phrases being associated with "man", then your beef is really with the last 3000 or 4000 so years of history. The concepts of equality across genders and sexual orientation are relatively recent in the last 20-40 years. History doesn't stop being history simply because we've evolved beyond some of our worst parts of it. We carry baggage for awhile as our language evolves to match our new values. Expecting language to change on a dime isn't very realistic. We'll need a few generations to die off and take this language with them.
I'm not who you're replying to, but I feel the same way as them. Take what I quoted from you above and replace man/boy with woman/girl. How is it any different? Maturity isn't gendered. Taking on adult responsibilities isn't gendered; heck you acknowledge that when you used the word "adult", it's right there in the language you used.
I'm not taking exception to thousands of years of history, because so many of the traits would still apply to both genders and aren't about equality. Keep in mind that's different than discussing gender roles which certainly have relevant history. But "taking care of your family" is a trait and women we expected to do that to. Just with different tasks. Same with being honest / honorable and just about any trait was practically speaking, non-gendered, but with gendered expressions of those traits.
I'd also say that if we don't try to change our language, then it will never change. If we don't immediately question questionable assertions, historically relevant or not, then it will never change. The best day to have questioned a definition of masculinity that isn't actually gender specific was thousands of years ago, the 2nd best day is today.
I will say I DO get what you are saying about history. It isn't lost on me how it has influenced cultural norms and language today. But I'm also saying that, ironically, if you isolate traits from expressions of those traits, even thousands of years ago I could make the same case that the traits weren't actually gendered if dissected.
You're doing the same thing they did. You skipped the OTHER criteria I listed for being “manly” besides just “goodness”, that being: for a person that identifies with the biological reproductive role of a male.
Agreed it isn't, but for a person that identifies with the biological reproductive role of a male, there is a specific term for it: "manly". Where did that come from? History.
With my explanation to that other poster, I'm more confused by your doubling down on it.
Here's what I'm saying "With X,Y, and Z it equals 'manly'"
You seem to be saying "Yes but if you remove X and Y, then why does the term 'manly' apply?". I agree with you, it no longer does. You're talking about something else at that point because you've removed characteristics that apply to the word "manly" so it no longer is that word.
No argument from me there. However it will be up to the very young generations growing up right now to change this. All the rest of us have grown up in a world of old definitions of masculinity. We can reject those and adopt the words, but we can't erase our knowledge of them. Most of the adult generations alive today will have to eventually die off for these ideas to disappear from our society.
I disagree. One of those specific traits is a person that identifies with the biological reproductive role of a male. If that trait remains, it cannot be ungendered. If you remove that trait, you're not talking about the word 'manly' anymore.
man upboss up, gender neutral.I like grow up, myself
man up boss upemotional-fortitude up, morer gender neutral.I mean yeah, they should probably be ungendered, but in our society they still do get gendered. A lot of expectation is placed on men to be the kind of hard-working person that will work a 50 hour week, put food on the table, be a perfect and present father to their children and a dependable rock for their partner while being perfectly in control of their emotions themselves (and don't you even think about crying) and still have time to build a furnace and teach the eldest how to change a tire and have an active social life and work out and improve themselves and do all those other things that a normal person needs to do. It's not good and it's not right, and it's not even what the OP was specifically talking about in the post, but that's why you'll see words like "strong", "dependable", "capable", etc thrown around in this thread a lot, because men like to feel that way because it feels like they've achieved at least some part of the frankly impossible image that's placed in young boy's heads of what a man should be.
I appreciate your breakdown. In other words, what you’re saying is that a man’s feeling of manliness is most often rooted in how closely he resembles societal expectations.
I think it’s pretty much the most reasonable explanation. But it still strikes me that men generally do not themselves think about it in those terms, and in fact consider it to be inherently emasculating. Masculinity viewed through this lens in essence becomes an act of submission to an outside force, which stands in contrast to many evident directives of masculinity such as independence and inherent drive.
Indeed the OP touches on this, implying that masculinity simply must be secured from within, with brazen disregard for the way others perceive you.
So if it does really come down to matching expectations, then it seems to be, as you said, frankly impossible
Yeah that's pretty much my thought as well. I don't seem to ever concern myself with "feeling" like a man, or even acting like one. I just act like who I am, and mostly concern myself with just trying to be a better human and I'm a long work in progress on that. But none of it is tied to some conscious sense of masculinity. I know the culture I was raised in certainly has an unconscious influence, but I can only effect those as I am made aware of them. For sure some of my worst traits are associated with maleness, but I don't consider them what makes me feel like a man when they come out, and for sure make me feel like an asshole. And we men and women both have assholes ;-)
That's a good question. I think most of the traits described here also apply to women, but as always, we're talking about overlapping Bell curves here. I think men derive their sense of self worth from things like strength, leadership and independence more so than women do on average. There's also traditionally feminine traits men derive self worth from, like empathy, affection and devotion. The same is probably true for women; little of column A, little of column B.
I don't think there's anything wrong with that, this is just how genders shake out on average, so the implication that a man shouldn't like feeling like one kind of bothers me.
Not who your responding too ...
I totally agree with your final thesis, it bothers me a lot too.
However, there's some nits I could pick with your construct of what drives men's (or women's) sense of self-worth as being part of the "bell curve". Meaning, that feeling of self-worth is itself derived from the culture they grow up in (read: imposed) and not some inherent trait that has been statistically examined and can be plotted on a bell curve (read: implicit).
I'd assert that the bell curves overlap 1 for 1 and that all "traits" being discussed are traits of a good person without respect to gender. Note: I'm not talking about physical traits, I'm just talking about traits of the mind and action. Emotional strength, women can and do have that. Strength of character, courage, leadership, independence, compassion, empathy, protectiveness, selflessness, charity, etc, these are all traits both genders can and ideally should objectively possess regardless if they've grown up being told otherwise. Even how those traits are made manifest are influenced by the society around them.
You didn't say it, but "Taking care of family" is the most laughable one I think I ever hear. Like, seriously? Women don't take care of their family? Aren't protective of their family? The only aspect of those that has any whiff of validity of being "masculine" is when it's associated with physical strength. But as a "trait", men have nothing on women for the societal expectations, and possibly the genetic "urge", to take care of their family. So I always just get a chuckle when someone lists taking care of family as something that defines being a man.
A lot of it is centered around achievement and feeling useful, so building or fixing something, physical activity, being seen as a provider etc.
It's why men with families etc take being made redundant quite badly, not being able to provide for your family can really make you feel like a failure.
That's also because we teach people that romantic relationships cannot be friendships. If your partner is your best friend then you aren't redundant, you're a power team.
I'm talking about losing your job, just to be clear.
Oh I see, the same point applies though. A friend pumps you up, gets you back out there. What we learn though is the guy is weak and should be left.
FYI this isn't a term Americans know. I was super confused when I moved to the UK and kept hearing it mostly because people being made redundant weren't technically 'being made redundant', if anything they were already made redundant (or just no longer needed for some other reason, or no longer affordable) and were now suffering the consequences. Idk, weird phrase, I'm going to go look up the etymology now. To be fair I suppose 'laid off' is pretty weird too
Given how commonly used it is in British media, I'm quite surprised by that.
Well that and not being able to put food on the table and a roof over their heads.
It's not about feelings at that point, even if they still exist.
When you take your shirt off, you lift something real heavy, open a beer without a bottlecap opener, and high five somebody and it hurts then you should be activating all the correct masculine endorphin triggers. A lot of it comes as a response from high testosterone hormone levels.
Imagine you know Rex-Kwan-Do and go home to Starla every night.
Ask a transmasc person
I don't know if it's gotten better these days, but back in the 90's "being a man" was more a definition of absence. Being a man was "not being a woman/girl." This caused a couple years of real difficulty for me as a high school boy, since women were (finally) allowed to do all the "male" things, which ended up defining the male identity out of existence.
I feel like this perspective needs a bigger audience, since it explains a whole lot about the incel/alpha backlash, and the gender divide in U.S. politics.
Some would argue that to feel like a man is to feel pain.
I agree with some of the other answers you've received, but I want to add one.
I think there's a kind of impulsive confidence, and unmitigated determination that lets me put on shorts when it's 20 degrees Fahrenheit out, then tells me to stay the course, and accept that I have entirely become cold, rather than merely passing by it.
As for what other people can do to help me feel that feeling, I have no idea. I do those things because of the way that I am. People have already tried encouraging or discouraging me, and it hasn't changed how I prefer to dress (for example).
Being a stubborn old fool isn't just a "man" trait 😜
But I suppose, being statistically more risk tolerant is a sign of being a man. Not sure if that nature, nurture, or both I'm not going to speculate. But we are where we are however we got here.
I for one, am amazed I've made it this many trips around the sun.
penetrate things
Just waiting for the day when someone can explain to me what makes a man a man without describing skills, qualities, and actions that anyone can do regardless of gender.
And don't tell me it's "have a penis", because if that were true then effeminate men wouldn't be insulted all the time for not being "real" men, and there wouldn't be toxic masculinity.
I'm a man because I say I'm a man and fuck anyone who tells me otherwise.
And that applies to anyone with any gender. Because it's not about anyone but that person.
Otherwise
Now fuck me please
I never said I would be doing the fucking.
Same question for women. Gender is only useful insofar as we decide it is. We have an inherent nature to categorize and differentiate, and in some cases that makes a lot of sense, but outside of strictly biological facts, that distinction between genders is nebulous at best.
Like religion, gender identity is personal, even if it stems from society. No two people will share the same opinion, it'd probably be weird if they did, and as long as they're not using their opinion as basis for fact, do whatever you want, man woman or anyone in between, outside, or around the spectrum.
Gender is a social construct that is, gladly, starting to fail.
I hope that in some years people would stop refering to having any gender, and they'll just have the social behavior they'd like best when they like it best. And will only discuss their sex when it's medically relevant.
Sadly unlikely because it's rooted in biological differences (mainly hormones), so on average there will be sex-based differences. I'd love it if people stopped stereotyping because of that but I doubt itll ever happen. Maybe we can at least get rid of the idea of gendered hobbies and such, but even then most people want to identify as part of a group so there will likely always be some association.
It's less that the social construct is failing, and more that we're finally letting it flourish.
Tying the way you present to the world to one of two options often linked to your gonads is extremely limiting. What you describe isn't the failure of gender, it's an explosion of genders.
A man is someone who identifies as a man.
Yes, it's circular.
A featherless biped or a miserable little pile of secrets, take your pick.
Idk, but i feel like it's just being who you are and respecting yourself.
Same as a woman being a woman.
Anyone that's confident in who they are isn't going to care or announce it.
All the blustering either way is just yelling "im a grown ass man/woman!" outside of a grocery store at 1 am.
I’ve always thought the least manly quality you can have is caring about how manly you are.
From somebody named "geekandmisandry".
That just shows you how impartial they are to the whole thing
Yeah because no one ever picks an online username that doesn't perfectly represent their irl personality 1:1
You have no idea how this person behaves offline, you're just reacting to their username
I thought that it was amusing. I have no idea why somebody would want that in their username.
When first reading "a man likes to feel like a man", i thought it was about trans men
Lol yeah I've never heard an adult male say this so that's the route I was going down too
That's the perfect answer, IMHO.
More in general, it's not up to others to change the way they act to feed somebody else's self-delusions of having some kind of quality they do not have.
I've actually had to deal with something somewhat parallel to this when I moved from The Netherlands (whose people are known for being blunt) to Britain (were everything is sugarcoated and people are evasive, the higher the social class the worst it gets) and then proceeded to go around unknowingly insulting just about every insecure person I met in that place by giving them my blunt opinion on what they cared about, without evasiveness or sugarcoating.
The balance I found was to stop giving my opinion unless asked and if asked by somebody who didn't know my ways yet, give them a notice ("I used to live in The Netherlands so just point out ways in which things can be improved, but that doesn't mean I think they're bad") and then proceed to give them my blunt opinion.
I have to feel that "a woman needs to feel like a woman" wouldn't get a similar reaction.
It sounds like something terfs would say to explain why being a tradwife is good and desirable.
Why is that the direction you're taking this? Have you not once noticed how women have a whole set of unspoken rules and shit that you gotta do to be part of their show?
That sort of could be interpreted as "a woman needs to know her place".
I'm not so sure. If I went around standing at doors waiting for them to be opened for me, I think it might get laughed at.
Lots of women do this, mostly very young ones with fresh naive boyfriends but its definitely not unheard of for a woman to act that way. Not that that excuses the men who behave like this also.
I once got told off by a woman in The Netherlands (to were I had immigrated from my native Portugal) for holding the door open for her and had to explain that it wasn't for her, it was because it made me feel good to be helpful and I did it for both men and women (if you've already gone to the trouble of openning the door, might as well keep it open for somebody who is just behind you).
I just found it funny how a cultural habit from somewhere else that wasn't even gender specific got interpreted as macho posturing.
Traditionally, societal opionions of how a woman should be involved her making herself appealing to men before married and submissive to her husband afterwards.
I would even say that "a man needs to feel like a man" and "a woman needs to feel like a woman" are two sides of the same original coin - it's just that in modern days the latter is frowned upon much more (though, sadly, a lot of people still go around with an interiorized version of it) than the former.
That sounds very TERF IMO, they're also hated
Yeah, whenever anybody talks like this, I just assume they're talking about traditional gender roles. So, "a woman needs to feel like a woman" gives me the ick, too.
Yeah, and they really need extreme effort to cater to. Maybe it just doesn't come so naturally for me in the spectrum, but it feels like a whole awful game balancing act that exists to let the other person think they're in charge.
Just don't cast shit on a man that's had enough of it from his work or society. Sometimes we just want to feel human.
That holds true from all genders to all genders, it isn't a uniquely "man" thing.
Yeah yeah all lives matter. This thread is about men tho.
Well, yes it is. But there is a lack of care about men at this time, and it is actually not a good thing. The patriarchy is bad for everyone.
Every human wants to be treated humanely. This is not exclusive to men. Neither is having a rough time due to one's job or society.
You're making the all lives matter argument
Lol. Kay.
I thought "feeling like a man" meant eating a lot of meat and losing money on sports betting.
Idk I don't do traditional man things.
I do do traditional man things: woodworking, maintenance on the family vehicles, and I’ve been thinking of getting into machining as a hobby because I have a lot of hand-me-down yard equipment that’s showing its age and I might need to start making my own parts because eBay is looking kind of barren.
Anyway, none of these activities have ever made me feel “manly” I never understood what that means. I feel like myself doing either something I enjoy, or something that needs to be done. My wife always says that she likes that she married such a manly guy who can fix all this stuff and make furniture, but anyone with functioning hands and a brain can do this stuff, it’s not exactly hard. Having a penis doesn’t make you an expert carpenter or mediocre mechanic, working with wood and old engines does that.
I know you're joking, but I don't get people who unironically think like this. Like whats preventing a woman from eating lots of meat and losing money on sports betting? Like what physical barrier prevents them from doing that? None.
So how could that define manhood?
Societal expectations. If enough people think it does then it does. Doesn't mean non-men can't do it, but they might get ostracized for it, just like men are when they do certain female-coded things. Why is blue for boys and pink for girls? Why are high-heels for women only? Doesn't have to make any actual sense, it just kinda is right now, even though it wasn't always the case.
It's all society. Always has been. Always will be. There are some very specific biological differences in the two sexes, and we've used those real differences to decide a bunch of fake differences we stick to out of convention. There's an idea of what a man is in our collective unconscious, an archetypal "man", and that's what people refer to, but that archetype is breaking down. Man, woman, gender in general. We're realizing that those distinctions aren't useful, and sometimes, maybe even most of the time, are detrimental.
That all said, humans are social creatures. That pressure, that idea of "man" is all around us. It's absolutely understandable that people can still generalize what "man" is. The concept doesn't have to be based on anything tangible to be relevant to our species.
Most 'man' things make me feel awkward and uncomfortable. Even when I was a kid. Other boys would wrestle and push each other around and stuff and I was like, "yeah, don't involve me in this."
And yet I have never been insecure about my gender. I'm fine being a man who isn't "traditionally" male.
I don't even own one flannel shirt.
A man likes to feel
likea manthats what i read it as lmaooooo
I need to feel like a man.I need someone to hold me tight for a moment.I need to feel
likea manDid the first person just translate "like a man" as "superior to you"? They done failed their own little word game.
Only if you're completely unwilling to unpack what things like "be a man" and "like a man" generally mean in the anglosphere, and how phrases like that have often been employed to reinforce the worst and most destructive aspects of masculinity.
Recent results show this is exactly what is happening.
Is this a real thing? I don't believe I've ever encountered this. I suspect they're actually being demeaning to men in general, or men who don't fit their idea of masculinity. I've encountered people like that. Though the opposite is more common (men, and women, demeaning women who don't fit their idea of what a woman should be like, or just demeaning women in general).
It very much is something you'll find in advice columns for women.
I also have never encountered this, although i didn't reach the same conclusion (or any conclusion apart from this is rare or not a thing).
Now im thinking about it you're probably right
LOL! Almost that exact phrase is what I use whenever my wife asks me why I'm peeing outside in my backyard instead of just going inside to the bathroom.
National trust is in favour of peeing in the garden. Can be good for some plants!
I've never heard anyone say that phrase, is it possible that people use that expression to mean "a man likes to feel like a man... not a machine"? Ie he has thoughts, emotions, and priorities. He is not a commodity, his worth is more than just profit he can produce.
Not that women don't also have those attributes, just that "man" is being used as an outdated shorthand for humanity.
I'm not sure how i feel about the post altogether. I mean, i understand that toxic masculinity is bad, but this post needs some assumptions and context to make me want to side with it. For example, if I saw some guy just kinda minding his business doing silly guy stuff and the context was he wants to "feel like a man," i don't think i would be offended or concerned?
r/justguysbeingdudes comes to mind
I've heard this one before from my conservative grandma, It's when a girl is doing something manly that the guy ""should"" be doing. Like if a girl is carrying in all the groceries while a guy is just watching someone would say "let [guy] do it, he's supposed to feel like a man"
This came up a lot as my sister is very much a 'do it yourself' kinda gal whereas her (now ex) boyfriend wasn't much of an initiative taker.
It's not about a guy not doing manly things, it's about stopping women from doing manly things.
(also note I'm using 'manly' in the stereotypical terms, not how I personally see them)
Again, that's added context. I don't know how feeling like a man is stopping a women from anything. I don't think that's a necessary component of the statement at all, though i appreciate the reply
"A man likes to feel like a man" is a good reason to allow trans men to get top surgery.
Whatever makes them happy I guess?
It probably is about feeling useful/needed. That's what men are taught to measure their self-worth in.
I think that's one possible explanation, but it's vague enough that it could be other things too.
It's hard to tell from the context, but it felt to me more like something a right-wing guy with really unrealistic expectations says to their soon to be ex-girlfriend (or possibly to the fiance in the marriage the church arranged) about how they need to be the one in charge.
Yeah I think we should believe that the witness correctly interpreted the meaning in the given context, but we shouldn't assume that everyone that says it means it like that. It's context dependant.
Funny thing: only ever heard women say this
Some women are the most toxic perpetuators a patriarchy in a backwards way
It's not "patriarchy", it's the collective of the social norms and pressures put in place by, perpetrated by, and maintained by, the majority of both sexes. The word implies it's males' fault society is the way it is, which is demonstrably bullshit.
I mean... No? I dont see where it would imply that its men fault. The word mean that men rule. The ODE define it by "a society, system, or country that is ruled or controlled by men" And the argument that both gender (sexes may not be the best word for what you were trying to say) are maintaining the system hold some truth, But you can t deny that men did vote in favour of the rapist in the last US election , or that it is men that are leading a war against feminism in Skorea.
So did women. 44% of them according to statistica
Yes women enforce the patriarchy too but as i was saying men are the main enforcer.
But they don't. Which is my point--people like you assert this is the case, so that when stuff is shitty, you can say things like 'well, the men are in charge, so if it's bad, it's men's fault', and in turn imply that women have zero agency in society and exist as nothing more than victims. You seem not to realize how deeply misogynistic it is to infantilize women this way, not to mention misandrist as well.
99.9% of men have no 'ruling' power whatsoever--they're in the weeds right alongside the 99.9% of women who also don't. To categorize either sex as 'the ruler' in American or any Western society is absolutely ridiculous.
The majority of US voters are women. If all of the women voted for the same candidate, that candidate would be guaranteed to win, every time.
But all of the women didn't do that, did they? Well, guess what? Neither did all of the men.
Well over thirty million women voted for Trump. Stop stereotyping the sexes and acting like they're hiveminds, it's plainly sexist bullshit.
Face it: the blame for any societal ill does not belong to one sex.
If a woman questions your masculinity, that's the biggest red flag.
because its not only men perpetuating this shit, some just put up with it and guide younger women on how to gently move things along and the flimsy little dude forgets and gets mad about the next dumb thing. Literally my parents...
Yeah, but you've seen the dudes who have that anxiety thing going on about it. They're not about to spell out their own repressed embarrassing stuff.
If that's the role-play you need from your partner and she agrees to it and you reciprocate; then sure. But it isn't society's, or your co-workers', job to do that.
oh crap did I [whoosh]? sorry.
In my defense, in this thread, that was way too easy to read with a snarky tone as it was with a sarcastic tone. But I can totally hear it now!
As a biological male and someone who identifies as a man, it's pretty weak, IMO, to need someone else to make you feel a particular way.
Are you in control of your feelings, or do you constantly need someone else to reinforce, or induce a feeling in you?
Personally, I'm in control of my feelings, and bluntly, nobody else has control over me. Neither for how I feel, or what I think/do; with the only exception to what I do being governed in part by legality. Eg. If I know a thing isn't legal to do, then I won't do that thing. Beyond the rule of law, I do, think, say, and feel, whatever, and however I want.
To me, having that much control over my own self is what makes me a person living in a free country. Anyone who does not have the ability, like I do, to think, feel, do, and love, whomever and, whatever they want, is someone who I want to support in gaining that right.
This seems ...um.. naive. I love my wife and her opinion of me affects my feelings. And the more I care about my wife, the more I love her, the more her opinion of me matters. Humans are social creatures and we look for positive feedback from the people we care most about. To pretend like this doesn't matter is silly.
I understand your point here.
People we care about should be people we care to make happy, and who we want to make us happy.
I'm speaking more about agency. I use my own agency to limit whose opinion can even move the needle to my emotions. I decide whether their comments are something I should "take to heart" or disregard as an outburst.
Personally I separate myself from most situations and emotional involvement and look at things from a neutral, logical standpoint before I allow myself and my own feelings to be affected by what may, or may not be said in the moment.
I don't need anyone to do anything to make me feel happy, or like a man. I control that. I'm not going to blame anyone for how I feel.
If you don't feel happy, or you don't "feel like a man" (whatever that means to you), the answers to why you feel that way, or how you inspire those feelings in yourself are entirely within your power to control. You have agency over your feelings.
My SO, when she compliments me, makes me feel good, but I don't need her to constantly placate me with compliments in order to feel valuable, appreciated, happy, or "like a man".
It is emotionally healthy to look inward for happiness and satisfaction. Relying on the acceptance and platitudes from others to feel okay is codependent. I don't understand why anyone would want to give their agency over their feelings and emotions, wholly and completely over to others.
The idea of controlling your feelings seems laughable. If you have control they aren't feelings, just thoughts. You cant really control thoughts either, just control what you do with them. Except we know that humans in general don't have great control of our actions either. We just have to live in this comfortable little lie where we have control over ourselves despite all evidence to the contrary in order to maintain a remotely reasonable society, but it's not real any more than your belief that you control your feelings.
While I don't think anyone has complete control of their own emotions, I do think some measure of control is possible through manipulation of one's own facial expression, posture, breathing & thought patterns.
Right you can hack your lizard brain with deep breathing to calm yourself down, but that seems like even more proof the you you think you are is only barely in charge of this mess we call a brain. If you can't calm down you can trick your body into calming down which then calms "you" down. Personally I tend to think the you you are is just a verbal processing system that retroactively analyzes what the rest of your brain does. If the reaction is slow enough, you can sometimes take charge and we call that modicum of authority "self control".
The whole microexpression thing, if valid, takes the facial expressions thing off the table.
Posture is...I guess controllable as a bulk coordinated muscle movement but tbh no clue why that's relevant.
I seem to remember reading that research of certain brain disorders has shown exactly that... Basically, without a functional corpus callosum, one side of your brain does something, then the other side (that had nothing to do with it) comes up with a reason why "it" did it.
There's a saying that stuck with me: "feelings are never wrong".
Your feelings are a fact of your continued human existence. Unless you're a psychopath or sociopath (or whatever) and you literally don't feel, your feelings simply are.
From there I determined that feelings can be inspired incorrectly from a given happenstance. While you may initially feel offended by something that is said, it's neither necessary to continue being offended, nor is it necessary to always have that reaction to that given happenstance. Accepting yourself as you are is vitally important in restructuring who you want to be.
This is all borderline cognitive behavioural therapy. Training yourself to be the best version of you that you can be. I've been dabbling in CBT techniques for most of my life. I wasn't aware that it was CBT when I started working on myself in this capacity, but I've recently learned that a lot of the techniques I've been using to better myself, and increase my agency and control over my own mind and emotions, is used in CBT.
I would agree that some thoughts are not controllable. We all get intrusive thoughts and impulses that we choose whether we want to act on them. Whether that action is to open your mouth and speak those thoughts aloud, or type them out, or to take action based on those thoughts.
The thoughts and actions you describe I understand to be system 1 thinking. Aka, thinking fast. There's a great book on this called "thinking: fast and slow" which covers the ideas. Basically system 1 is your "fast" thinking, heuristic/instinctual/"muscle memory" systems. It's your "knee jerk" reactions and your first thought on something. System 2 is your contemplative and analytical systems, aka, "thinking slow". System 2 can educate system 1, which is how we form habits and "muscle memory"
System 1, we have little immediate control over since the majority of our sapience is fully embedded in system 2.
I would agree that there's a nontrivial number of people going around under only the learned behaviors from system 1, and doing very little analysis of what's happening by utilizing system 2.
People in general like receiving positive feedback. There is no need to assign feedback to gender roles.
I agree.
If I may ask, did you feel the need to post this because you felt that I was portraying the opposite, or are you building on the point?
I'm hoping it's the latter, but if it's the former, please tell me what I said that made you feel that way. I'm always trying to improve my communication.
Misandry is sexism
Yeah but none of this is misandry.
Check the usernames. Someone that claims misandry as their identity is just spreading it.
It's possible for two things to be true at the same time. A misandrist can say something that's not misandry. And OP is not misandry.
Sure, and a MAGAt Trumper can say something that's true as well. I will still call out their shitty identity because they are the enemy of progress.
Well like, that's just your opinion man.
The problem is you didn't just call out their shitty identity
you also tried to use it to negate their assertion
Or said another way, you made an ad hominem attack and I called you YOU out on it.
I would absolutely rather fall victim to a debate fallacy rather than blatant bigotry. The original commentor is absolutely a bigot by their own admission, however my logical extension of their broadcasting their own bigotry doesn't necessarily fall into an ad hominem attack. All I ever said was that the original commentor was arguing in bad faith.
You absolutely did fall into an ad hominem attack by putting words in my mouth. I never attempted to negate their assertion, address their assertion, or even summarize their assertion. I simply said their assertion was made in bad faith.
And we can probably agree to disagree on that. -Cheers and enjoy your Thanksgiving (if US based of course)
Normalize feeling like a man as somebody who is given space to feel anything beyond anger or shame. A man needs to feel like he can talk about things on his mind at any given time, to anybody he trusts. A man is somebody who can cry when he is hurting, and it be okay; that he won’t be labeled as weak or a coward.
Those aren't traits of a man. Those are traits of a human. Both other than that, 100% agree a person needs that.
That’s the entire point. Traditionally, men are not treated like a human being. They are expected to be something else entirely, and it’s both not fair and infeasible.
I'm sorry you feel that way. But as a testicle-American I can say the feeling is not universal.
Look at Mr. Well-Adjusted over here.
A wife would know exactly what it means and how to do this.
Mine puts up with my dad jokes and tell me I look handsome when Im all gross and covered in dirt after a long day working outside. That's more than enough for me.
When I come in sore and cold from shoveling the latest buttload of snow and she tells the kids to go cuddle daddy and warm me up? Yeah that makes me feel pretty good.
Contrary to what some people claim, a lot of women do find men attractive that can get themselves dirty and are crafty. That is, if it doesn't come with manners like a cavemen.
we are simple beings.
Pack her bags? That's what I would expect my wife to do if I told her it was her job to reinforce my masculinity.
This whole “like a man” thing sounds to me like an extension of the toxic cultural BS where “men” are not just humans with emotions and needs like every other human. It reeks of men who are too scared or ignorant to be self-aware and figure out what life really means to them, and thus they need the people around them (especially the partners) to play along in their power/masculinity fantasy.
What a man needs is to realize he’s just another human, and that for humans happiness and fulfillment can ultimately only come from within. Relationships with others are crucial, and you might even need some medication to get your brain chemistry unfucked, but neither of those are independently going to make you happy with yourself and “feel like a man.”
“A man” can refer to roughly half the adult population. It’s not exactly an exclusive club. Why not leave gender out if it and try to be “a good person” and see where that gets you?
Having the people around you walking on eggshells to keep your manly ego intact, whether it’s out of fear or pity, is the exact opposite of what a good person should strive for. What if the people around you instead trust you, feel safe with you, laugh with you, and are better off with you in their lives?
Source: Am man. Went through some stuff. Figured some things out. Made some things better. Have wife and child who enjoy life.
Pride come before the fall
Ooooohhhhh…
Thats why pride month is in june
I get it now.
Oh! They call Autumn Fall in America.
I get it now.
Leo is mostly in August though, so August should be pride month.
My partner calls that Leo season
I mean it’s right there in the quote. They want to feel like a man. They don’t actually want to be one.
What makes a man ? is it being prepared to do the right thing, no matter the cost ?
No a man is a miserable little pile of secrets
Or it's a plucked chicken
Ah yes, man bad
The first is a quote from Dracula in one of the Castlevanias, the other is an ancient Greek rebuttal on a logic statement regarding what a man is
No. That's just what makes a good person. Pretty much the same with every other "Being a man means yadda yadda yadda" I've ever heard so far. Every time, what follows are a list of qualities that make a good person/human, and are neither exclusive to men, nor counterfactual for women. To think otherwise would be to imply that women don't/can't/shouldn't possess those qualities (I'm not saying you thought otherwise Hadriscus; I'm just taking my thought to the next logical step).
I don't have a satisfying answer for what "makes a man" because I reject the entire concept that there is any list of qualities of what makes a [gender]; or that one is even needed. The closest could be a pair of testicles (per Laser's reply), but then we'd enter into a trans debate and frankly I support trans-rights.
Or to really sum it all up, the entire debate is just a bunch of gatekeeping and social identity politics ("man" and "woman" both) that really is just stupid and counterproductive to us all getting along.
yea, I agree,... nothing to add. 👌🏼 My post above was just a quote from the big lebowski, I'm glad it prompted such a thoughtful reply
[face palm] I haven't seen that movie in a LOOOONG time.
What makes a man? Is it the power in his hands? Or is it his quest for glory?
https://youtu.be/851BqHMCaeM?
I actually thought that was what the previous comment was referencing. Awesome
hahaha haven't heard that in a lifetime !
Great, now it's time for me to listen to this on repeat for the rest of the week. Again.
Edit: Now you're a man, a
Has science gone too far?
And what makes a man turn neutral? Is it the lust for gold? Power?
I was just born with a heart filled with neutrality.
Tell my wife I said hello.
Sure, that, and a pair of testicles.
You joke, but perhaps... perhaps you're right.
You're 2ft11
Edit: ft and inches are hard for halfsies
Or maybe we are just sick and tired of fighting the world and don’t want that kind of drama at home with our partner.
I hate dealing with some types of men, it's exhausting.
What is a man?! Nothing but a miserable pile of secrets. But enough talk... Have at you!
https://youtu.be/QfJE5Oin1Ag
And if i have to pretend that your ass looks good for you to feel good about your ass, your ass doesn’t look good.
Now let’s get past the idea that relationships don’t involve theater for our partner’s benefit.
Every man is by definition a man and feels like one.
i wish that were true
Why does he want to feel like Man? Is he stupid?
What's wrong with wanting to feel like a man? There's nothing inherently negative about that. I like providing for my wife and I want nothing in return. I like doing typical man stuff with my friends. Why does that make you feel like I'm trying to be superior to anyone? I am comfortable in my masculinity and so should anyone who wants to be, stop treating that as toxic.
edit: Express your opinion by downvoting me if you must, but do me the courtesy of answering the question.
You doing things for you is fine.
It's when other people need to change their behaviors that it becomes a problem.
Sure I agree with that, but how is that implied by 'a man likes to feel like a man'?
The post shows a woman talking about how she was told her strong personality could make men insecure.
No it doesn't. It shows a woman imagining things that weren't said, which is then responded to with an anecdote.
edit: Yeah I guess I'm wrong here. The second post does talk about that. Still, I don't think 'A man likes to feel like a man' implies anyone needs to do anything to accommodate.
Literally couldn't read two posts
What's the context that you're imagining this topic coming up? Because from my perspective, as a man, if someone said this to me about someone else I'd assume that I'm being asked to come up with some made up work, so that some junior guy on my team, or some dude in my social group who is feeling down, can feel more useful.
Which I might or might not accommodate, but it's kinda patronizing and would effectively have the opposite effect in building up my respect for that man.
I'm not imagining any context, I am taking the statement at face value. I am a man, and I like to behave in a way that makes me feel like it. Like mentioned elsewhere in this thread, that means feeling useful, it means being relied upon by others, it means honouring the responsibilities I have towards others.
But you need to imagine a context, or there's no conversation to be had because it makes now sense in a vacuum. In what world does anyone just say something like, "A man likes to feel like a man" without context?
You provided your own context which generally is about what you do for yourself. Though I'm slightly skeptical that you choose to do those things specifically in the context of "today I want to do something for myself that makes me feel like a man". You just do the things you like; full stop. But if I'm wrong, you do you, no judgement or kink-shaming ;-) I kid!
So in the more general context of debating what it means when someone says "A man likes to feel like a man" you have to wonder what drove them to say it and to whom. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume it was said in response to someone doing/not doing, or approving/disapproving of something the speaker associates with feeling like a man. And with that very generic context one has to ask, why is it someone else's responsibility to do/not do something to make someone feel like a man? And why does anyone's approval/disapproval impact someone else's sense of masculinity?
As for feeling useful, being relied upon, honouring responsibilities, how are those traits of being a man? I ask that in the context of, how are they not just traits of a good person. When someone doesn't do those things that doesn't make them not a man, it makes them not a good person full stop.
Hit dog yelps. *
*Autocorrect is the bane of online existence
Nothing's wrong with feeling like a man.
I feel for this post because I've been told by bosses that men aren't used to people like me. They'd get used to it if women weren't told to dumb themselves down for the poor boys raised on some fabricated ideal of manliness. I don't like to think of traits or talents being gendered because it's exclusionary.
When I go in to buy computer parts I still get asked if I'm sure that's what my boyfriend wants? I never mention a boyfriend, they just assume. I don't ask for help in hardware stores because nine times out of ten it's gonna start a whole argument with someone who thinks they know my project better than I do.
I see the same thing happening to guys, saw a dude at a yarn shop get asked if he was gettin supplies for his wife. That sucks, right? It sucks to feel less like who you are because of what you like. That shit keeps up the gender divide because not everyone has the energy to risk feeling a little worse to do the things they enjoy.
So yeah, I'll never describe an activity as typically male or female.
As it turns out, the things that make a good man are the same things that make a good person.
I love cooking and baking. Whenever there's a family get together I try to make something whether it's a full dish or some sweet bread for desert.
None of the other guys have ever complimented me on any if it, they all compliment my wife on 'her' delicious food. She corrects them and they say nothing, it turns into a weird situation for some reason and it seems like they're embarrassed to admit they like something made by a man? It's weird
The toxic masculinity on my wife's side is absolutely crazy and really sad.
That sucks. Hard to be yourself around people when navigating their fragile beliefs is like playing epistemological fiddlesticks. Weird when most executive chefs are male.
I donno the answer. Make 'em some pink sparkle shortbread infused with whiskey and bacon and watch their minds implode.
That's not a bad idea. I'll tell them I cooked it on the grill while smoking a cigar so no ones feelings get hurt.
I won’t bore you with repetition so I’ll just link.
I think we mostly agree, doing the stuff you want to do in life should not be stifled by your gender. But in the OP and in this thread I get the feeling that “a man likes to feel like a man” automatically carries with it the implication that others should accommodate (by for example dumbing themselves down in order not to damage fragile masculinity as you said). I don’t see that implication at all. Is there some cultural context I’m missing here? Is this something you would say in a context where fragile masculinity is in danger of being harmed?
The last question is a leading one and poorly framed, so I won't answer it. This is a thread about two comments on a discussion, we don't know the context of what came before or any relationship these two people had.
But yeah, in my circles of women who are just fucking tired, we've all been told we gotta let men be men, and that's somehow our responsibility. So that's the context, we hear that phrase in a different tone than men do.
Shhh
Man bad
Op hates men I guess. That's my take away.
At this point, I'm not even sure what it feels like to be human.
Geekandmisandry. Misandry ie. someone who hates men.
Well at least you're open about it. Many aren't when they attack men.
Here's the thing about "toxic masculinity". Some people are toxic. Women and men tend to express that toxicity in different ways. Attacking an entire gender for the behaviour of the worst is stereotyping.
More broadly it's part of the modern notion that we are on teams and that the other team is bad.
Of course both men and women can be toxic. The point of toxic masculinity as a term is to draw attention to the fact that there's a certain brand of toxicity that has much more harmful outcomes in male-dominated spaces, for a variety of social and cultural reasons. It tends to be a rather controversial term mostly because it gets conflated with the idea that masculinity itself is toxic (which is not what it's supposed to mean).
The discussion should be about the magnitude of the problem, not hand-waving it away because women do it too but in different ways. The "different ways" is kind of the whole point of the argument.
Also, that's a lot of extrapolation you did simply from a username in a screenshot. Would you describe any of their actual words in the post as misandrist?
I mean, it pretty clearly implies "feeling like a man" is only a bad thing. That "feeling like a man" can only be done in ways that make others feel inferior. That seems pretty misandrous. to me. Enough to call misandry right away? No. But between that and the name, they're starting to set a theme.
I got the impression that it's fine for a man to "feel like a man" but that that needs to be something he finds on his own terms, and needs to come from within. It's not something he gets to impose upon others, such that it demands their cooperation or subordination. If to anyone, masculinity requires them being superior to others... maybe they need to do some soul searching.
Perhaps the user's name does contribute to a theme. I don't see anything specifically wrong with what was mentioned in this post, but we would need more context to determine who's in the wrong, Reddit AITA style.
and every women is beautifull.
Empowerment is for women only. Noted.
How are you empowered by "feeling like a man"? What does that even mean?
Why would it matter what it means? There is someone asking for validation and is ridiculed for it.
Why are strangers under any obligation to validate each other?
Where do you get the obligation part?
What would you consider a proper response to this?
To what exactly?
Empowerment is when people make themselves subservient around you? If you need everyone around you do defer to your ego that's not empowerment.
Is respecting someone as a human really being subservient? Or is someone strutting around demanding respect for who one is, really just demanding everyone else to be subservient?
The source of women's empowerment isn't men pretending that women are strong. It's women who changed.
Did you really make an account just to post Facebook-tier self-help nonsense? With all the emoji spam, I bet it actually was copy/pasted off of Facebook. Get out of here.
It‘s AI generated.
Even worse. Blegh.
Therapy.
For real, I've been doing it for two years now and it helped a lot.