Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Homophobia

  1. #1
    Senior Member Manalysis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    4,658
    Rep Power
    82

    Homophobia

    Hi,

    I was wondering ... how much of social repression of homosexuality has been due to channeling men's resources into family life?
    In a culture aiming to expand through population increase, "natural bachelorhood" can't have been regarded as very desireable,
    as we see from the numerous laws on single men and their property.
    In short, what if the dreaded homophobia is simply due to gynocentrism, and not to some weird psychlogical defect from 'men's gender role'?

    M

  2. #2
    Senior Member voidspawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,167
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Manalysis View Post
    Hi,

    I was wondering ... how much of social repression of homosexuality has been due to channeling men's resources into family life?
    In a culture aiming to expand through population increase, "natural bachelorhood" can't have been regarded as very desireable,
    as we see from the numerous laws on single men and their property.
    In short, what if the dreaded homophobia is simply due to gynocentrism, and not to some weird psychlogical defect from 'men's gender role'?

    M
    Very good question M. I have no idea. But two opinions I'll stick up.

    You get two forms of homophobic reaction from some men. By far with most men the most homophobic reaction you'll possibly get is piss taking, and to be honest, if you walk into a room having slightly cocked up your morning shave you'll get more piss taking. Men take the piss the out of each other it's a fact. Men do it to see how much they like each other, it's that simple. That said let's look at these two views.

    Men who feel or feign repugnance at male homosexuality.

    I've known a broad variety of people who've done this. Generally it's very easy to say what you doing that for? Sometimes it's cos they thought it's funny, other times it's just a declaration to reassert their own masculinity. A male behaving like a female looks funny, either comedic funny or weird funny. It's a thing, it's been part of theatre for thousands of years. These men aren't homophobic, just noisy. Pretty much every male I've known whose done this, also has a private story of a positive experience with a gay male, either getting a compliment or supportive statement, and they most definitely don't support attacks on gay men. For whatever reason they just feel obligated to signal their heterosexuality.

    Now we should look at this need to signal their heterosexuality a bit more. Because that is the crucial factor here. It's not wanting to have a go at gay men, these guys are about, it's wanting to declare heterosexuality.

    Media dictates that male sexuality is just flung all over the place. NO, not even a little. Worship of the female form is flung all over the place, not celebration of male sexuality. Straight male sexuality can only be celebrated if females express appreciation of it, or males are allowed to as secondary tales.

    When was the last time you saw a guy who could happily talk about pleasing women with sex, rather than doing stuff for her and giving her stuff (that you can boast about.) Males are not allowed to say their sexuality is pleasing to women, they are attractive. It's social faux pas, a true double standard. Even when I was young, 'god's gift to women' was a put down sharply used by women towards men who even dared imply that their girlfriends (whether past or present) liked them and wanted them. Bitchcraft dictates that women are the pursued and desirable and men have to be made to pay.

    How does that relate to men voicing disgust jocular or otherwise about gay men. Women will drop rumours that men are gay with relish, had it done to me more than once, never made a blind bit of sense at the time, it was in fact simply an attack on my red pill nature. Not kowtowing to women, must be cos you are gay and you want to kowtow to men was their attitude. Male avoidance reaction to getting that rumour put around about them, is make the declaration, me no homo, look me take piss out of homo... Dumb shmoes, wrong reaction, want to stop women spreading shitty rumours about you, give the cow a dressing down for chatting shit, right reaction use your goddamn masculine strength, no need to badmouth gay men and about 100% more effective.

    Second version is more insidious, these are the guys who in public don't say a bad word about gay men, but in private then talk about it being disgusting and unnatural. Men who want to do something to protect the natural order. Exactly what they got against gay men, I don't know they simply define them as wrong. Men in their minds exist to perform a role as men. Deeply tradcon type mentality, willing to do actually do things (if they can get away with it) to protect the natural order as they conceive it. Men who are definitely determined to protect women's roles, women's position as the way to protect their own. These guys I don't like or trust gynocentric to the core blue pill henchmen.

    Finding gay men funny, weird, not wanting to get called one, all just a non event thing, a social performance, a desire to signal to women who ignore, toy with and judge them that they like women (and want to be liked by women) in an environment where you can either be rich, masculine alpha as fuck or just permanently be treated like a eunuch bag carrier by women.

    The other stuff, deep seated female protective gynocentrism a hatred of threats to women. That kind of hatred easily spills over to attacking MHRM, red pillers, MGTOW etc basically anything that doesn't conform to their holy mother is source of all life and virtue view of the world. I don't know of any particular factors in their childhood, but I'd dare hazard a guess they the women in their lives especially their mothers were manipulative users of conditional love.

    So yeah I'd agree homophobia is gynocentric at root. It's makes no logical sense for a straight male to be homophobic. As straight male there are two ways to think about it, i.e. that the dude is well man friendly, maybe a bit too much but as long as he takes cough, splutter, hell no as an answer it's all cool or if a good looking gay man wants take himself out of the competition for women... well gosh darn it, seriously no skin of my nose.
    "...especially when it comes to communication, it can be observed, if it is not a negotiation it's a war."
    Quote Originally Posted by menrppl2 View Post
    Can't live with em, life is great without them.

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    26
    Rep Power
    5
    Hey Manalysis!

    I'm really, really happy you brought this up. This is a topic that concerns me very much, since I noticed how gynocentrism is deeply, deeply rooted in gay men and the institutions claiming to represent them after becoming conscious of how it was for a very long time a barrier that kept me from listening to Men's rights.

    I obviously have a lot to say on this topic, but have written so much that I'm just gonna keep it to this until I finish up writing my other post.

    An Explanation for Fallacious Accusations of Homophobia against the MRAs

    Fallacious accusations of 'rampant' homophobia within the Men's Rights Movement was a HUGE motivation for me to take the Red Pill. I noticed it when I watched the Red Pill documentary, I noticed in in the Queer political scene at my university when they protested its screening in Sydney, I then started noticing it in myself and became incredibly self-conscious.

    It made me realise the mechanisms of homophobia from a perspective that makes a lot better sense after I became conscious of how I'd falsely accused many straight men of homophobia. It made me aware of how and why these false accusations happen, and given that seems to be a problem for Men's Rights, I'd like to offer what seems to be the best explanation.

    This is obviously a contentious topic in society that many straight men are understandably terrified to bring up out of fear of being labelled homophobes. I want to start by acknowledging that as a gay man who has done it in the past myself and seen it done by many people I know, gay men will often label conversations as homophobic for no other reason than that it makes them uncomfortable, and often weaponise it as a means of distancing themselves from people they disagree with.

    From my observations and experience, this is done for three main reasons:

    1) On an interpersonal level, a gay man will become hypercritical of a straight man in an effort to prove he is not attracted to him. An attraction to a straight man not only invites danger from the man himself, but also from the society they are both a part of. The gay man then reflexively goes to further lengths to prove he is not attracted, and this happens whether or not the gay man is in fact attracted to the straight man.

    It is a normal reaction for a straight man to be taken aback by any unreciprocated sexual interest, let alone from another man. In the vast majority cases, this doesn't result in violence, but when the gay man is overtaken by the fear of it, he will go to more extreme measures to distance himself.

    This situation is of course much worse in societies where homosexual attraction is not accepted or understood, because the gay man will become self-conscious and paranoid of his thoughts and actions around straight men, and therefore more fearful and go to further lengths to distance himself. However, the straight man also has every right to be fearful of sexual assault, especially if he is in a vulnerable social position, and he must be allowed to do everything within his means to prevent that from happening.

    Needless to say, this has all been a very tricky balancing act for our interactions as a Society, and thankfully we've come to a point today that has vastly improved. However, all of this headway has made way for another problem that has become more prevalent. In places where gay male sexuality is culturally acceptable but straight male sexuality is still not, the problem may present that the gay man will openly display attraction to the straight man, yet treat him as disposable as a means of proving he is not possessive. This is what is commonly known as 'objectification'.

    Calling a straight man a homophobe is a very good way not only of distancing him from you, but also of making him just as afraid of you as you are of him. This lose-lose situation a very unfortunate misunderstanding, since neither's fear is warranted but has escalated into an uncomfortable situation for everyone.

    2) This brings me to the second reason, which more often represents self-interested interactions on a broader social scale. Gay men may be aware of their ability to throw someone under the bus by calling them a homophobe and personally benefit from the repercussions they face. In most cases, he will rationalise this by arguing that gay men are mistreated in society, drawing from his own previous experiences of marginalisation.

    For example, I was once planning on cancelling a gym membership because I was moving cities soon. Exactly on the fortnight before I was about to leave, I saw a poster saying this:

    Are you
    a weakling?
    a crybaby?
    a whimp?
    a pussy?
    a queer?
    No? Then lift those weights!


    I was at the time offended by the poster, but I also saw it as a golden opportunity to cancel my gym membership. All I had to do was write a letter of complaint and presto, cancellation fee gone.

    3) The final reason may use either of the two previous reasons, but speaks more to the social motivations that encourage them and always involves a large social scale. Often, the reaction to call someone a homophobe is purely habitual. Why wouldn't a gay man be motivated to fallaciously label someone a homophobe if it has so far meant that it has gotten him what he wanted from social interactions?

    Since the label of 'homophobe' relies on a society that is cautious of those accused of homophobia, fallaciously labelling someone as homophobic speaks not only of meeting ones own self-interests, but to satisfy their interactions with those around them. This is made possible by a society that blames straight male sexuality on all of the worlds problems, dismisses mens issues and sees gay men's effeminacy and/or mistreatment of straight men as a means of distancing themselves from the 'bad' people and siding with the 'good' people.

    For example, Huffington Post and Upworthy makes a profit by pumping out accusations of homophobia left right and centre, and these accusations are often fallacious and dubious and debated from within the gay rights community. This is the epitome of habitual name-calling that satisfies a society that reads the content.

    I have a lot more unfinished stuff written up on this pointing to the Queer rights political alliance with Feminism, and the Feminist preference and support for effeminate gay men over hyper-masculine gay men, despite how effeminacy and hyper-masculinity are both essential to gay sexuality, yet hyper-masculinity in gay men has been disposed of.

    Even with the gay male world, effeminate gay men are the central social point in the social world. For example, drag queens are the most popular, and saying you prefer 'femme' guys is acceptable whereas preferences for masculine guys 'masc4masc' on gay dating websites is very widely condemned within gay culture.

    Essentially, gay men have only been afforded their rights to openly display their love in exchange for supporting and protecting women. Since gay men by nature will not support or provide for women in marriage, Feminism allowed them to do it by surrogacy. This is why Feminism is in support of most of the same-sex marriage movements.

    I argue that throughout society the same roles are still in place as ever. Gay men are still respected to fulfil the traditional male gender role of supporting a women, and whether that is by forced marriage or Feminism, any open display of independent masculinity is threatened with castration. In the old days that castration was medical, but these days it is figurative and cultural. Gay men are prevented from acknowledging their rights as men - through for example the mens rights movement - because Feminism as figuratively castrated ideas of their sexuality, preferring to see gay men as women and treating them as such.

    I'll get that next post up tomorrow hopefully.
    Last edited by Cam_Schwz; 07-09-2017 at 02:34 PM.

  4. #4
    Senior Member voidspawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,167
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Cam_Schwz View Post
    Hey Manalysis!

    I'm really, really happy you brought this up. This is a topic that concerns me very much, since I noticed how gynocentrism is deeply, deeply rooted in gay men and the institutions claiming to represent them after becoming conscious of how it was for a very long time a barrier that kept me from listening to Men's rights.
    ...
    I'll get that next post up tomorrow hopefully.
    Incredibly insightful post Cam, things I've never been aware of. You really should consider writing these things up for the main site. The angle on the main site is primarily now towards men's health and wellbeing, but this material fits into that. An exploration of the toxifying of relationships between gay and straight men is important, and I've never seen it done before.

    It's totally true, women have made it about them. Never really made much sense to me. Lesbians make it all about women, defend women, straight men, all about women defend women, gay men, all about women defend women. Seriously unbalanced, even men who are the most capable humans of loving men are pushed into gynocentric, andro-heterophobic positions. And that isn't to ignore the roles straight males are also co opted into doing this to themselves.
    "...especially when it comes to communication, it can be observed, if it is not a negotiation it's a war."
    Quote Originally Posted by menrppl2 View Post
    Can't live with em, life is great without them.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Manalysis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    4,658
    Rep Power
    82
    Hi,

    this was obviously a topic with many facets - I must admit that I wasn't aware of of those mentioned in your replies.
    It certainly wasn't what I had in mind.

    To clarify, my starting point was feminist "theory" and their gleeful embrace of Connell's hypotheses of 'hegemonic masculinity'.
    The basis here is the intersection (yeah, yeah, I know) of developmental psychology and sociology's constructivist theories of identity.
    In developmental psychology, boys' transition to manhood is said to be fraught with difficulties and dangers, resulting in men fearful of "falling back into boyhood", i.e. falling out of manhood, and therefore fearing women, to say nothing of "strong women". Add to this theories of identity being constructed, produced by culture, and culture - at least under patriarchy - being toxic, you have a flawed raw material undergoing a process adding more flaws: slugs and snails and puppydogs' tails intent on rape, that's us.
    And homophobia is suppposed to be part of this rejection of the feminine, in the same vein as "throwing like a girl" issues are about men distancing themselves from the feminine. So homophobia is supposed to be this cultural trait ingrained in all men, due to toxic patriarchy.

    This contrasts a bit with my experience that mothers are the people who sternly warn all kids growing up of the dangers of Men Bearing Candy. "Strange men" are projected as some dark shadow falling over the idyllic street of Suburbia. Childhood fears usually loom large in peoples' psyche, and perhaps the combination of the powerful emotion of fear with the out-grouping of men (never women) could well trump rival theories for explanatory power. For all I know, that is.
    In real life, we also all know that women are quick with verdict "he must be gay" - and this is _never_ meant as a compliment.
    If that isn't homophobia, what is?
    I'm not going to claim any causalities here, but I believe the thought merits being developed and studied.

    Of course modern culture does little to convey an image if men that is true in its portrayal of the freedom that is the lot and legacy of men.
    Men can do everything, and have done everything, wrt. e.g. friendship. we also know that women dislike anything that threatens their monopoly on emotions.
    It would not surprise me if they instinctively work to sever all the channels that could nourish a man's soul which are not rooted in the presence of some woman.
    We're supposed to draw all supplies from one single supplier, with control over price, which makes us open to endless blackmail.

    M

  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    26
    Rep Power
    5
    @voldspawn

    Thanks for the suggestion, that would be super cool. Where would I submit it?

    @manalysis

    Yeah, true. What I meant by writing what I did about MRA's being falsely accused of homophobia was a preface what I was writing next, but it ended up taking a lot of space and time. Hope it didn't seem too off topic.

    Even though I'm not straight, even I am afraid of being accused of 'internalised-homophobia', so I can't imagine how much more nervous it must make straight guys to be accused of it. I mean, even I know what it's like to be terrified of those activists, and they used to like me for what I said. I know that look they give you when you step 'out of line'... that look that says 'you are human garbage'. I know how there's this whole vernacular of language you need to abide by just so that they won't start cutting you down or spread nasty rumours, and how the only way you can survive amongst them is to speak their words of regurgitated rhetoric, which while they're coming out of your mouth feel alien and disconnected.

    It.is.terrifying.

    Seeing Dean Esmay at the Canadian rally for Men and Boys footage in the Red Pill documentary... how much he was shaking... It just made me realise, [I]"fuck, this is what we've been doing to one another... and for what?"

    Jordan Peterson talks about how using other people's language for the purpose of work has driven people he knew crazy. I can tell you that this is completely what happens, and I've heard it happening to other gay men as well, particularly who are working or studying social work. I was homeless as a kid and being cared for by Social Workers in a Safe Space youth organisation, and I can tell you they are far too quick to medicalise normal male behaviour with ADHD and Asperger's syndrome. I was diagnosed under their recommendations in late adulthood after struggling with education.

    I was accepted into needs based safe space student accommodation, and was so desperate to find a place to live I told them my complete medical history hoping that it might help me get in. After my experiences here, I would've preferred to be homeless. Every time I said something they disagreed with they told me it must have been because of my medical conditions.

    I believed them. Every authority figure was telling me this was true. I started blaming everything on myself to the point that I got physically sick. I once got in such a panic because I was answering questions for a Sociology worksheet and all I could hear in my head were the voices of the people in the Safe Spaces telling me that what I was thinking was wrong. I got up to leave because I couldn't deal with it, then I forgot where I locked up my bike, and I blamed myself for that too, thinking that because I had ADHD I was bad with memory and just a plainly bad, disordered person. I ran around campus for 15-20 minutes hyperventilating because I couldn't figure out where I'd locked it up. I had to call a friend to calm me down and walk me through the steps of what I was doing before that.

    All this time I thought that I had internalised homophobia, transphobia, racism and misogyny. Gay men aren't safe from any of these aggressive accusations. The further they go into any field of education, academia or in certain fields of work like Social Work, the more likely they are to be the targets.

    For me now, that's the worst thing about remembering those Queer activists protesting the MRAs in the Red Pill and the documentary screenings, because I know why they are doing it. I know that most of these guys have gone through this same system that I did and are downright terrified of doing anything else. Feminism has fear-mongered these boys into believing that they are in real, tangible danger just from the sound of someone speaking.

    MRAs deserve to know that.

    Hegemonic Masculinity

    I am very familiar with the concept. I'm at the University of Sydney, Australia, and this is where it originated. It is part of Raewyn Connell's gender order theory. In my Sociology class, my tutor emailed the class to tell us about it and asked our thoughts on it.

    It's obvious to me from researching hegemonic masculinity that Feminism has co-opted gay men.

    I got into very, very long and detailed email discussions with my Sociology tutor. I would show him reference after reference, source after source, and after all of it I feel like I only chipped away at the surface of getting him to understand what I was saying. It felt unfair, like I was under so much expectation to go to all this effort at the threat of being considered a misogynist.

    Anyway, here's what I wrote him in one of those E-mails. As you can see, Hegemonic masculinity has very much to do with the gay community:

    The concept contains a complicated framework to explain the existence of oppression of men by men. It draws upon the work of Dennis Altman in his book ‘Homosexual: Oppression & Liberation’. I located an interesting part of his book, in which he adds a poem written by Gay rights activists ‘the Flaming Faggot Collective’:

    “When witches were burned in the middle ages, the Inquisitors ordered the good burghers
    (all of them men, of course)
to scour the jungles for jailed queers
drag them out and tie them together in bundles, mix them in with bundles of wood
    at the feet of the women, and set them on fire
    to kindle a flame
    foul enough for a witch to burn in The sticks of wood in bundles like that
    were called faggots
and that's what they called the queers; too, and call us still,
meaning our extinction, our complete
    extermination,
anthrocide and gynocide their one response to any heretical blasphemy against
a god-given manliness.”

    Witch-Burning was undeniably a horrendous, misogynistic attack targeted attack on women. However, to put these problems into a wider context would reveal the relative statistical insignificance of deaths from Witch Burning when compared to the male population of Early Medieval Europe. I’ve added a Graph below listing Death rates from military conflicts in England from the 1170s-1900s. I originally leant about this from Steven Pinkers book ‘The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence has Declined’ but found this graph on this website. This is the original source: Clark, A Farewell to Alms: A brief Economic History of the World, 2008

    Unknown.jpg

    Altman then goes on to define Homophobia as rooted in misogyny; an attack on the feminine behaviour of gay men. This isn’t proven by comparing references to violence, in any era. Men are still the majority of victims of violence in today’s world, and live on average 6 years less than women. The most serious issues that gay men suffer are that of drug dependence and homelessness and suicide, which are not problems specific to gay men, but of men broadly. Men as a group comprise the vast majority of suicides, the homeless and the drug-dependant.

    To apply MacConnell’s theory of hegemonic masculinity might explain these issues, however, it seems wildly inappropriate. It would demand that men blame their problems on themselves, which has already become a stigmatised method in social work when dealing with issues of suicide, homelessness and drug dependency. Why should Masculinity be any different?

    This brings us to perhaps the most drastic and publicly-aware problem that the gay community has faced and still continues to struggle with: The HIV/AIDS epidemic and general sexual health problems. What is the difference between a Feminist theory blaming men for their own problems and straight men blaming gay men for their problems? By extension, how does this compare with men blaming problems on themselves?

    This brings me to my final point. Hegemonic masculinity ultimately blames men for their own problems by using a complicated set of connected social mechanics, as is evident with this mind map:

    Hmasc.jpg

    During a Q&A session following the premiere of the Red Pill documentary, Gender theorist Karen Straughn asked Feminist Sociologist William Farrell to clarify the meaning of the phrase ‘Toxic Masculinity’. She argued that an 8-year-old boy does not have the mental capacity to connect the ‘pretzelised’ mental logic required in order to come to the conclusion that he is a good person. Understood this way, telling boys that their gender is ‘toxic’ resembles child abuse.

    This isn’t to say that any of this is a recent problem which has been spurred by modern Feminism. Infanticide was once common, and it took social revolutions of Children’s rights to make child abuse and neglect considered morally reprehensible. In the above-mentioned book by Steven Pinker, he includes historical literature of children being referred to as ‘evil’ that was deserving of punishment:

    “Though hunter-gatherers tend to use corporal punishment in moderation, the dominant method of child-rearing in every other society comes right out of Alice in Wonderland: “Speak roughly to your little boy, and beat him when he sneezes.” The reigning theory of child development was that children were innately depraved and could be socialized only by force. The expression “Spare the rod and spoil the child” has been attributed to an advisor to the king of Assyria in the 7th century BCE and may have been the source of Proverbs 13:24, “He that spareth the rod hateth his son: But he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.” A medieval French verse advised, “Better to beat your child when small than to see him hanged when grown…”

    “As with all punishments, human ingenuity rose to the technological challenge of delivering experiences that were as unpleasant as possible. DeMause writes of medieval Europe:

    That children with devils in them had to be beaten goes without saying…


    Conclusion:

    The Sociological theories posed by Feminism about patriarchy seem inapplicable to –at least – gay men. It could be argued that they are an important and valuable resource designed to include women in University studies. However, the problem of gender distribution lies with female underrepresentation in STEM fields, not Social Sciences, where they clearly comprise a majority of students in USYD. Female students are on the whole more likely to complete a degree than men, with men have higher dropout rates than women.
    Last edited by Cam_Schwz; 07-10-2017 at 09:26 AM.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Manalysis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    4,658
    Rep Power
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by Cam_Schwz View Post
    Hope it didn't seem too off topic.
    AFAICS, it's all part of the same topic, but located somewhere else: in its effects. I was trying to aim for the root cause.
    You seem more qualifed than me to do that, it seems you have immersed yourself deeply into some of the source material.
    (Just remember to shower afterwards ...)

    Even though I'm not straight, even I am afraid of being accused of 'internalised-homophobia', so I can't imagine how much more nervous it must make straight guys to be accused of it.
    It's worse than that. First of all, according to feminist theoretical contortions, homophobia is not something you need to be accused of - it is simply part of men's mental make-up, so there's no excaping it, it's just there, like gravity. You can get accused of acting on in, letting it show, where you shouldn't have. Where you're not constantly "overcoming you baser self". Write that little phrase on a slip of paper, and bring it as you watch tv or movies - how often is a man required to do that, how often does the "psychological plot" hang on some guy overcoming himself, how often is women's criticism of the movie guy in essence a demand for him to overcome himself, how often is his lack of wanting or managing to 'get over himself' the main obstacle?
    But there's yet another twist: A man can't go around advertising that he's not homphobic "because he's fine with homosexuality" either;
    I mean, that would just be so ... gay ...! in the eyes of his peers and the women around him.
    So men are not allowed to be homophobic, and not allowed to not be it.

    Also, this "damned if you do, damned if you don't" "just can't win" attack is typically how a lot of females construct arguments (also as in 'quarrels') agsainst men.
    It's clear that the objective is not to establish some proposition, but to use mental "search and destroy" denial-of-ground tactics.

    I mean, even I know what it's like to be terrified of those activists, and they used to like me for what I said. I know that look they give you when you step 'out of line'... that look that says 'you are human garbage'. I know how there's this whole vernacular of language you need to abide by just so that they won't start cutting you down or spread nasty rumours, and how the only way you can survive amongst them is to speak their words of regurgitated rhetoric, which while they're coming out of your mouth feel alien and disconnected.
    Can't for the life of me remember where ... a russian novel, set under Stalin, where an office instituted meaningless measures whose sole purpose was to reveal those who were against the measures ... That's how such behavioral codes function. Demanding obedience to more and more abstruse instructions helps them pick out the half-hearted.

    I was homeless as a kid and being cared for by Social Workers in a Safe Space youth organisation, and I can tell you they are far too quick to medicalise normal male behaviour with ADHD and Asperger's syndrome. I was diagnosed under their recommendations in late adulthood after struggling with education.
    .... Every time I said something they disagreed with they told me it must have been because of my medical conditions.
    Iatrogene disease ...
    Have you seen the accounts of those reporters brave enough to have themselves committed to mental facilities?
    How the doctors all found these presumeably healthy people to suffer from a variety of psychological ailments, curable only by medication and a long stay? That no amount of normal behaviour could make them reverse their diagnoses?
    Reminiscent of the "institutional theory of art": Art is what is presented by a gallery or a museum.
    Similarly, madness is what can be observed among people in a mental facility.
    Your "problems" are the behaviour you display while in an institution created to alleviate these problems.

    And all you had to do was to overcome yourself ...

    All this time I thought that I had internalised homophobia, transphobia, racism and misogyny.
    Even the weirdest of sci-fi, like "Alien", is constructed of what we already know: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitoid_wasp
    Now translate this into psychology.

    Gay men aren't safe from any of these aggressive accusations.
    No, why should they be? Whatever else they are, they are men.
    Do you know if the accusation of homophobia is levelled as often against lesbians? As a control group, like.

    The further they go into any field of education, academia or in certain fields of work like Social Work, the more likely they are to be the targets.
    The further they rise, the stronger become the need for control.

    It's obvious to me from researching hegemonic masculinity that Feminism has co-opted gay men.
    Indeed.



    The concept contains a complicated framework to explain the existence of oppression of men by men.
    Well, there is oppression of men by men.
    The question is if that is due to us being 'toxic', or if we need to just follow the money.


    I’ve added a Graph below listing Death rates from military conflicts in England from the 1170s-1900s.
    Very interesting, but without the graph of non-military deaths - for both men and women - I fear the full story is obscured.
    But of course what women object to is "men doing things to women".
    The column "what men do to men" is irrelevant to them, except as proof of men's evil.
    They pride themselves on there not being any comparable graph for "what women do to men".
    And they are right, there isn't. All abusers target those who are weaker; for women this means children, and probably others in need of care.
    And all that goes on there is hidden beneath the double veil of privateness and women's saintliness.
    And if women want to attack someone stronger, they either use behind-the-facade social pressure, if it has traction;
    if it doesn't, they use proxy violence by other men.

    What goes on in the home is, I suspect, very much along the lines of teaching boys to disregard their own emotions.
    To teach him that his emotions do not count, and that he should not consult them. The opposite of the Princess on the Pea.
    The result of this is that he learns that he has no human value, and soa large part of that which is inside him "goes away",
    leaving the empty shell of a man with little or no personality inside.
    This is what "overcome yourself" is, what it means, and what it does to boys.

    Altman then goes on to define Homophobia as rooted in misogyny; an attack on the feminine behaviour of gay men.
    Precisely. Change "an attack on the feminine behaviour of gay men" to "an attack on the feminine behaviour of men", and you have the whole malicious theory.
    (To turn it into social history, change it to "an attack on the behaviour of men". For a prognosis, simply use "an attack on men".)

    To apply MacConnell’s theory of hegemonic masculinity might explain these issues, however, it seems wildly inappropriate. It would demand that men blame their problems on themselves
    Well, there's truth to it, provided you think the world is on the wrong track and needs fixing.
    With redacted language, your mind map could be a model of the marxist world view.
    The whole upper section would be called "ideology" (as they understand it), and the power and wealth relations would be primary,
    producing 'gender inequalities'. The feminist version takes the gender parameter as primary, producing "economic inequalities'.
    And it's hard to find a counter-model, because conservatism suffers from 'theory deprivation'
    For those who have wealth and power, the world is as it should be, and this does not invite speculation as to why things are as they are.
    I personally think that one such rival model, the darwinian fight for survival, is inhuman, partly in its consequences, partly in that it amounts to little more than abandoning ourselves to the untamed natural forces of human behaviour, where we'd have a lot to gain on being more rational.
    But that's just me.

    which has already become a stigmatised method in social work when dealing with issues of suicide, homelessness and drug dependency.
    Why should Masculinity be any different?
    Well, obviously, because it's not about ideals or principles like justice and fairness.
    It's a men-vs-females tribal in/out-group fight for power and resources.

    This brings us to perhaps the most drastic and publicly-aware problem that the gay community has faced and still continues to struggle with: The HIV/AIDS epidemic and general sexual health problems. What is the difference between a Feminist theory blaming men for their own problems and straight men blaming gay men for their problems? By extension, how does this compare with men blaming problems on themselves?
    A very, very good question.

    This brings me to my final point. Hegemonic masculinity ultimately blames men for their own problems by using a complicated set of connected social mechanics, as is evident with this mind map:

    Hmasc.jpg
    Do you have any rival theory? Or do you know of any?

    During a Q&A session following the premiere of the Red Pill documentary, Gender theorist Karen Straughn asked Feminist Sociologist William Farrell to clarify the meaning of the phrase ‘Toxic Masculinity’. She argued that an 8-year-old boy does not have the mental capacity to connect the ‘pretzelised’ mental logic required in order to come to the conclusion that he is a good person. Understood this way, telling boys that their gender is ‘toxic’ resembles child abuse.
    Yes. It must be comparable to telling a black kid, way back in 1850, that unfortunately he's black, and that's why he can't have nice things.

    Steven Pinker /.../ includes historical literature of children being referred to as ‘evil’ that was deserving of punishment
    Yes, that's the old pre-Rousseau view of human nature as unformed, and if not formed, prone to savagery.
    That man only becomes man if adapted by and into culture, and if left to fend for himself, will descend to a "wild man".
    Perhaps that's how women still see men.

    The Sociological theories posed by Feminism about patriarchy seem inapplicable to –at least – gay men.
    "At least"? Understatement of the year

    It could be argued that they are an important and valuable resource designed to include women in University studies.
    To the degree that that is of value in itself.

    M
    Last edited by Manalysis; 07-10-2017 at 12:09 PM.

  8. #8
    Senior Member voidspawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,167
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Cam_Schwz View Post
    @voldspawn

    Thanks for the suggestion, that would be super cool. Where would I submit it?
    https://www.avoiceformen.com/policie...rs-guidelines/

    Also Grumpy Old Man one of the mods here, has helped people get pieces published on the main site. He can be contacted on through this system, also he has a thread on how to Skype him: http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showt...ype-Voice-Chat and GOM is one of many that also connect on Discord http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showt...-and-come-chat

    A fair few options, and plenty of support.
    "...especially when it comes to communication, it can be observed, if it is not a negotiation it's a war."
    Quote Originally Posted by menrppl2 View Post
    Can't live with em, life is great without them.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •