So what is this toxic masculinity thing anyhow?

[carpedm9587]

I see. So even if you do the right thing, liberals still have an avenue to call you guilty because they can simply accuse you of doing it for the wrong reasons. Heads, they win; tails, you lose.

This kind of thinking is precisely why I don't take that United Nations survey that Tass referenced seriously.

Doing the right thing is significantly tainted if it is for the wrong reasons and continues a negative/toxic mindset. If I help the little old lady across the road because I want her to be safe as a fellow human being, all good. If I help the little old lady across the road because I see she is carrying a big purse and hope she'll give me money - not so much. In both cases I help the women across the road - but one is motivated by kindness and generosity, and the other by greed.

Intention is a significant part of the moral value of any act.

And anyone that jumps to the conclusion that someone else is doing something for the wrong reasons is attempting to mind read. That tendency does not appear to be limited to liberals, as far as I can tell.

[Cow Poke]

Doing the right thing is significantly tainted if it is for the wrong reasons and continues a negative/toxic mindset. If I help the little old lady across the road because I want her to be safe as a fellow human being, all good. If I help the little old lady across the road because I see she is carrying a big purse and hope she'll give me money - not so much. In both cases I help the women across the road - but one is motivated by kindness and generosity, and the other by greed.

Intention is a significant part of the moral value of any act.

And anyone that jumps to the conclusion that someone else is doing something for the wrong reasons is attempting to mind read. That tendency does not appear to be limited to liberals, as far as I can tell.

Wow... so opening a door for a woman is now compared to helping a lady with a big purse cause you hope to get money. I hope that sounded better in your head. That's not why gentlemen treat women like ladies.

[Joel]

The behavior is simply men who do not know what it truly means to be "masculine." They have perverted it.

So a better term would be toxic non-masculinity?
Is it true that those engaging in such behaviors think that those behaviors are what it means to be masculine? How do you know? Perhaps they know the actions are wrong? Perhaps they know they aren't being a gentleman? Do we know that anyone is actually confusing these wrong actions with masculinity?

"Toxic water" is simply water that has been poisoned. It does not imply that all water is bad. "Toxic gas" is simply any form of gas that is harmful. It doesn't mean all gas is bad.

Those different examples have different meanings. The first is water with toxins mixed in. Whereas a toxic gas is not harmless gas with toxins added, but one of a number of gasses that is toxic.
Perhaps another analogy could be a water glass filled with mercury, which is toxic, but not at all water.

So would you say that "toxic masculinity" is more like non-masculinity, or masculinity with bad stuff added, or one of a number of masculinities? Or perhaps someone else might say it's a subset of masculinity?

I realize you were using these examples only to say that "toxic" is being used as a qualifier, and not as a description of all masculinity. But a qualifier can have various meanings, and it's usually not clear which is intended. If for example, "toxic masculinity" is thought of as a subset of masculinity, it still sounds like (as Sparko wrote) "tainting masculinity itself"--that part of what a man is is bad. It could still also sound like men are being asked to give up part of what it means to be masculine.

It seems the examples brought up of "toxic masculinity" are usually directly opposed to the idea of a real gentleman, and thus could be said to be non-masculinity? Traditionally we'd just call it sin. Then are we just statistically identifying certain sins that men are more prone to, and certain sins that women are more prone to?

[Mountain Man]

Doing the right thing is significantly tainted if it is for the wrong reasons and continues a negative/toxic mindset. If I help the little old lady across the road because I want her to be safe as a fellow human being, all good. If I help the little old lady across the road because I see she is carrying a big purse and hope she'll give me money - not so much. In both cases I help the women across the road - but one is motivated by kindness and generosity, and the other by greed.

Intention is a significant part of the moral value of any act.

And anyone that jumps to the conclusion that someone else is doing something for the wrong reasons is attempting to mind read. That tendency does not appear to be limited to liberals, as far as I can tell.

But don't you see? Promoting theories like toxic masculinity, systemic racism, micro-aggression, critical race theory, white privilege, and so on encourages people to unfairly second guess others.

"You look nice today."
"Don't you dare undress me with your eyes!"
"But it was a sincere compliment."
"That's just your toxic masculinity talking."

An extreme example, perhaps, but we saw something very similar in the Pope's wall thread where you read racist subtext into seer's perfectly innocent remarks because of your unfounded suspicions that he was speaking from hidden biases.

To put it more simply, if you're conditioned to always look for certain behaviors then you'll find them every time

[carpedm9587]

Wow... so opening a door for a woman is now compared to helping a lady with a big purse cause you hope to get money. I hope that sounded better in your head. That's not why gentlemen treat women like ladies.

What the heck IS it with you people?

I don't think anyone on this site has accurately reflected anything I've said for the last few weeks. It rather makes conversation pointless. Do you really ENJOY misrepresenting what others say and then making cute emojis? Is that really productive for any of you?

[Cow Poke]

What the heck IS it with you people?

I don't think anyone on this site has accurately reflected anything I've said for the last few weeks. It rather makes conversation pointless. Do you really ENJOY misrepresenting what others say and then making cute emojis? Is that really productive for any of you?

The very fact that you bring up "doing something for money" in relation to a discussion about being a gentleman is just beyond wacky. I didn't misrepresent anything you said - I simply objected to you bringing up "doing it for money" in that context.

Sheeeeesh, calm yourself!

[carpedm9587]

The very fact that you bring up "doing something for money" in relation to a discussion about being a gentleman is just beyond wacky. I didn't misrepresent anything you said - I simply objected to you bringing up "doing it for money" in that context.

Sheeeeesh, calm yourself!

See if you can actually follow the logic if I lay it out more clearly for you...

Opening the door because I'm a big man and your a little lady - bad
Opening the door because I can and it's a gesture of kindness - good

Helping little lady because she might pay me - bad
Helping little lady because she needs the help and I want to keep her safe - good.

Now - if that doesn't help - I suggest a couple hours reading a logic book and perhaps a good enema...

[rogue06]

Doing the right thing is significantly tainted if it is for the wrong reasons and continues a negative/toxic mindset. If I help the little old lady across the road because I want her to be safe as a fellow human being, all good. If I help the little old lady across the road because I see she is carrying a big purse and hope she'll give me money - not so much. In both cases I help the women across the road - but one is motivated by kindness and generosity, and the other by greed.

Intention is a significant part of the moral value of any act.

And anyone that jumps to the conclusion that someone else is doing something for the wrong reasons is attempting to mind read. That tendency does not appear to be limited to liberals, as far as I can tell.

Personally I feel that anyone who thinks other people usually do good deeds (or are just being a decent human being) because they hope to benefit from the act says a whole lot more about what sorta person they are than anything else.

[carpedm9587]

Personally I feel that anyone who thinks other people usually do good deeds (or are just being a decent human being) because they hope to benefit from the act says a whole lot more about what sorta person they are than anything else.

I agree - and if I ever meet anyone who actually assumes that of other people - I'll be sure to tell them..

[Cow Poke]

See if you can actually follow the logic if I lay it out more clearly for you...

There ya go with the condescending attitude again.

Opening the door because I'm a big man and your a little lady - bad

Using "your" when you mean "you're" - even worse.

Seriously, to think those of us who open doors for women do it for that reason is just nuts.

Opening the door because I can and it's a gesture of kindness - good

Yes, particularly if it's a lady.

Helping little lady because she might pay me - bad
Helping little lady because she needs the help and I want to keep her safe - good.

THAT is just a dumb analogy that has nothing to do with being a gentleman.

Now - if that doesn't help - I suggest a couple hours reading a logic book and perhaps a good enema...

Not after that thing has been in YOUR mouth!

[carpedm9587]

But don't you see? Promoting theories like toxic masculinity, systemic racism, micro-aggression, critical race theory, white privilege, and so on encourages people to unfairly second guess others.

"You look nice today."
"Don't you dare undress me with your eyes!"
"But it was a sincere compliment."
"That's just your toxic masculinity talking."

An extreme example, perhaps, but we saw something very similar in the Pope's wall thread where you read racist subtext into seer's perfectly innocent remarks because of your unfounded suspicions that he was speaking from hidden biases.

To put it more simply, if you're conditioned to always look for certain behaviors then you'll find them every time

Your clueless opinion is duly noted...

[carpedm9587]

There ya go with the condescending attitude again.

I know - but when dealing with obvious morons - you kind of have to condescend.

Using "your" when you mean "you're" - even worse.

Yeah - kind of messes with my groove

Seriously, to think those of us who open doors for women do it for that reason is just nuts.

I agree - if I find anyone who actually thinks that and says that - I'll be sure to let them know we agree on that point...

Yes, particularly if it's a lady.

You really need a hobby. This is like tossing pearls before swine.

THAT is just a dumb analogy that has nothing to do with being a gentleman.

I figured it would be lost on you. I think I need to have the discussion with someone who has a little more intellectual horsepower.

Not after that thing has been in YOUR mouth!

I'm always one to try new tastes...

[Tassman]

You max out your own Drama Queenery in a post criticizing Drama Queenery? Sad!

It's all he's got, he's somewhat limited. We must be kind.

The UN has some flaws but it's not half as bad as you conservatives here like to pretend.

Perhaps I should have used Trump, the man he voted for, as an example of sexual harassment and aggression. He just grabs women's genitals and kisses them because "I just can't help myself".

[carpedm9587]

Perhaps I should have used Trump, the man he voted for, as an example of sexual harassment and aggression. He just grabs women's genitals and kisses them because "I just can't help myself".

Actually - I think he said it's because they let him... so he's innocent. Honest!

[Cow Poke]

It's all he's got, he's somewhat limited. We must be kind.

Yeah, when ya gonna start?