If you got anything for me to read or watch, feel free to share.
You must log in or register to comment.
Being entirely uneducated in the topic besides being a dude I’m gonna go with being masc is to protect or be in service of the femme.
I refuse to explain myself and am running away now
Ahh yes the way of the house husband.
do you mean in its current form, or what is a theoretical revolutionary masculinity? can there exist such a thing? i don’t have the answers but i find it to be a very interesting question.
What is masculinity anyway?!
We made it the fuck up!Between the ancients complaining about men (see: The Fremen Mirage, IIIa) to the modern manosphere content complaining about what isn’t masculine (see: When Toxicity is Masked as Positivity) to false presentations of manhood (see: Why do conservative shows all look the same?) to blaming women (see: Why We Blame Women for The Masculinity Crisis) I am convinced there is no such thing as an Objective Masculinity outside of its socially constructed forms. We really do make it the fuck up! Worse, Masculine and Feminine often is code for Strong and Weak without saying as much, giving it that oh-so-western misogyny flavor, to say nothing about the Gay Panic.
I found YouTube links in your comment. Here are links to the same videos on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Link 1:
Link 2:
Link 3:
There really is nothing to masculinity besides saying “I am masculine” i suppose in the end. Stereotypical masculinity is easier to figure out, and I think a non-toxic version of that is maybe what you are looking for. To me, being a man is saying “hell yeah dude” to stuff.
A miserable little pile of secrets.
Jojo’s Bizarre adventure, start from season 1
Narancia is peak masculinity. Change my mind.1993 or 2012?
I had distilled it down to “you want it so you go after it” but feminism is about giving women the ability to do that in society. And then I don’t like any small gamates kind of explanation either (which means unfortunately the madTV “he looka lika man” bit doesn’t make for a good punchline). I don’t like any particular set of interests as gendered.
My best bet? I was thinking about that video game where people got all mad about the black samurai. It was based in a true story, right? Some dude saw this historically judged individual and decided to make him a friend. I developed (see: rederived probably) this idea that dudes rock the most when they open their hearts and minds to people they were conditioned to judge. Dudes rocked when they domesticated wolves. Everyone must have thought they were crazy, but they probably Danced with the Frickin Wolves. Dudes rocked in the Green Book. Dudes are rocking on Red Note. The essence of masculinity is therefore “I think you’re all wrong*: I’ve seen this and I think it is/they are awesome”
*Perhaps optional
See Inkmaster season 12: battle of the sexes
I’d highly recommend “Under Saturn’s shadow” by Hollis James, and then “King, Warrior, Magician, Lover” by Robert Moore & Douglas Gilette.
“King, Warrior, Magician, Lover” by Robert Moore & Douglas Gilette
Lmao the men’s mythopoetic movement are what you get when you cross a theater kid and an MRA. They are strictly better than Tate and his ilk, in that they don’t start at open misogyny, sure. But their idealist (read: un-materialist) and essentialising aproach to gender verges on outright mysticism and is of the same cloth as christo-fascist patriarchy.
“Under Saturn’s shadow”
50% of what this author says is reasonable but the other 50% is conservative propaganda and acceptance of the status quo based on creepy mystical arguments that assume there is some primordial truth in a social order that was invented within the last 400 years
that was invented within the last 400 years
If you have read the book through how did you come up with this number? Asking out of genuine interest.
400 years ago is 1625.
That’s very close to the time when the first ever common stock was issued - 1602. It was issued by the Dutch East India company to fund “adventures” in the indies where they “traded”, plunderer, kidnapped, and squatted. It was, in essence, the beginning of the current formation wherein colonialism and private business fused into a global network of terror, slavery, mass murder, and grand theft.
That was about 100 years after Europeans began colonizing the Western Hemisphere and at the same time completed the Reconquista against the Muslim kingdoms (driving them from Europe and establishing the continent as Christian) so some would say the ideas of masculinity today really started to form 500 years ago.
I made it the fuck up as a ballpark because I forgot the exact figure but the simple answer is that the western masculine and feminine social roles that he constantly gestures towards were invented to serve the interests of the elite land/private-property owning class as western powers moved away from feudalism towards mercantile capitalism and eventually the industrial revolution and imperialist global conquest.
The men go to work and have the surplus value they generate for the boss stolen while women stay at home and perform all the maintenance labor for free (such as taking care of the kids). This was the social model pushed on the masses by the elites because it ensured smooth operation of a system where they benefited the most.
He attributes real social problems like expensive cost of living/nonexistant employee bargaining power/social malaise due to the systems we use to relate to each other being fundamentally antagonistic and anti-human solely to a mystical individualist problem (a crisis of initiation), an interesting theory but a gross oversimplification of reality.
