Masculinity

[Knuckles Red]

You're saying this is toxic masculinity but can't define masculinity.

The point in asking how one defines masculinity is to point out that there is no actual definition. Just the superficial traits assigned to us socially, and culturally within a given society. Basically that masculinity is a creation of man that we adhere to as a subconscious response to media, interactions with family/peers and education. There is nothing actual about masculinity, but the effects of toxic masculinity (which can result from those feeling they haven't lived up to their gender role) are very real, and very present all throughout our culture.

 

[Gravity]

Can gay men be masculine?

Are women who exhibit these characteristics masculine?

Sure gay men can be masculine just like straight men can be feminine. Your man-crush young thug claims that he's straight but he's clearly feminine.

Women who exhibit those characteristics can be masculine and they can be feminine. It's all about the context in which those characteristics or behavior is displayed. For instance, women are natural protectors of children but being a military officer or a policeman is a masculine job. Women can build shyt, but being a construction worker is a masculine job. Men can care for children but being a nanny is a feminine job. Get it?

 

[Ol’Otis]

nikkas is using big words

 

[Neuromancer]

The point in asking how one defines masculinity is to point out that there is no actual definition. Just the superficial traits assigned to us socially, and culturally within a given society. Basically that masculinity is a creation of man that we adhere to as a subconscious response to media, interactions with family/peers and education. There is nothing actual about masculinity, but the effects of toxic masculinity (which can result from those feeling they haven't lived up to their gender role) are very real, and very present all throughout our culture.

Again you're contradicting yourself. If masculinity is not real then how can someone participate in toxic masculinity. By your own admission one of those words has no real meaning. If gender roles aren't real then how can one participate in either its positive or negative aspects? That's like saying I'm allergic to strawberries and get sick while imagining what they taste like.

 

[Neuromancer]

No, for the time being I refuse to read Nietzsche. I started to read "The Gay Science" and the man made too much sense. I dislike the feeling of not knowing where my own reasoning ends and that of the writer starts. I also grew envious of his aphorisms. I'm putting it off until I'm more grounded in my own thought. I admit though, some of this language is entirely his.

I do like Schopenhauer though.

So you subscribe to neither the idea of the overman or nietzchien satanism. Hmm.

 

[Knuckles Red]

Again you're contradicting yourself. If masculinity is not real then how can someone participate in toxic masculinity. By your own admission one of those words has no real meaning. If gender roles aren't real then how can one participate in either its positive or negative aspects? That's like saying I'm allergic to strawberries and get sick while imagining what they taste like.

The point in asking how one defines masculinity is to point out that there is no actual definition. Just the superficial traits assigned to us socially, and culturally within a given society. Basically that masculinity is a creation of man that we adhere to as a subconscious response to media, interactions with family/peers and education.

 

[blockburna420]

My boss, she got a goatee and a mustache. is it possible she got too much testosterone from sucking dikk and swallowing nut?


serious question people

 

[RAX 010]

I'm about to lift some.weights

 

[Absalom's Thought]

.

 

[Knuckles Red]

This is what I mean. I think my own vision for man is similar to the Übermensch. That is that we must overcome man in his present state, do away with useless relics of the past and bring him to a level of perfection that nature and evolution were not capable. Just as the smith hammers the metal into shape, so must men be hammered into a finer material. I think this is what our journey has always been about. Perfecting ourselves just as much as we perfect by degrees everything around us.

I'm not familiar with the concept of Nietzchien satanism.



Of course not numbnuts. There is no definition of kindness or tallness or loudness, yet you intrinsically know what they are. It is sometimes beyond the scope of our ability to synthesize and define things that are so complex as to almost infinite degrees of variance. What we are telling you is that there was a standard, a goal, a something that was expected of men even across culture and language and ethnicity. That can be easily identified. It was there for a reason and again, if only tacitly understood, it had a purpose. Of course it can be whatever you want it to. But traditionally what was it? and why was it so? Those are the questions.


Peace to all. Will update when possible...

Maybe it doesn't anymore. Maybe it won't at all in the future.

 

[Neuromancer]

Still not real by your own admission. You can't practice something that isn't real.

 

[Neuromancer]

Maybe it doesn't anymore. Maybe it won't at all in the future.

And maybe people just don't want it to. Remember you're a minority in your thinking. So.unless all men change this wont.

 

[Neuromancer]

This is what I mean. I think my own vision for man is similar to the Übermensch. That is that we must overcome man in his present state, do away with useless relics of the past and bring him to a level of perfection that nature and evolution were not capable. Just as the smith hammers the metal into shape, so must man be hammered into a finer material. I think this is what our journey has always been about. Perfecting ourselves just as much as we perfect by degrees everything around us.

I'm not familiar with the concept of Nietzchien satanism.



Of course not numbnuts. There is no definition of kindness or tallness or loudness, yet you intrinsically know what they are. It is sometimes beyond the scope of our ability to synthesize and define things that are so complex as to almost infinite degrees of variance. What we are telling you is that there was a standard, a goal, a something that was expected of men even across culture and language and ethnicity. That can be easily identified. It was there for a reason and again, if only tacitly understood, it had a purpose. Of course it can be whatever you want it to. But traditionally what was it? and why was it so? Those are the questions.



That is another question I intend to address. Is it still needed?

Peace to all. Will update when possible...

You remind me of my twin brother.

 

[Knuckles Red]

Still not real by your own admission. You can't practice something that isn't real.

Its real in its consequences; similar to how race is real in its consequences, but is race real? Is it actual? No. Are its consequences? Absolutely!

And maybe people just don't want it to. Remember you're a minority in your thinking. So.unless all men change this wont.

Its already changing, and it will continue to change. People's attitudes toward gender, I mean.

 

[Gonzo]

So... Following that logic, white folks are the most masculine race since they dominated most other cultures and still remain in power today.

According to OP, masculinity is in itself oppressive. "to master, subdue, shape to its will"

If someone does not fit within this narrative are they less of a man?

I didn't know history began and ended with the white man's rule.

Power is given and power is also ultimately taken away.