It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Schools offer ‘safe spaces’ to combat ‘toxic masculinity'--“Unlearning Toxic Masculinity”

page: 22
18
<< 19  20  21    23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: JD163

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: JD163

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: JD163

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: JD163

Why should I have to tell you that the best option would be to call the police?


Because step up is ambiguous and taken in this context, one would understand it as get involved. And calling the police may not be the best option. The people involved in such a hypothetical situation may not want the authorities involved.


Police are trained in handling violent situations, most of us are not. We obviously have different mindsets which your mindset is probably the most common.


True, cops are trained to handle violent encounters, but your whole premise is that the violence must be stop, one way or another, not everyone agrees with that. And having different mindset is a good thing IMO, unless you prefer that we are all clones and think the same way,....how dull would life be?


I wasn't discussing strictly violence must stop, but rather learning how societal programming feeds into toxic behaviour, lack of anger control, etc. of which young (mostly) men and women in colleges obviously need help with because of many issues, one of them includes violence.


Its also the societal programming narrative that people object to, what you are talking about is people with impulse control issues, people behave differently and would react differently, and pretending that we can teach people not to get angry/why they get angry is hilarious at best. Anger is an emotion that everyone experiences,.....its how you deal with it that matters.....this 'learning how societal programming feeds into toxic behaviour' ...its telling people that your anger issues are due to an external influence, its society fault you can't control yourself...I would much rather that people owned up to their actions and take responsibility instead of feeding them some made up social construct BS


And you are free to disagree and keep whatever behaviours you want to keep, but for those who want to be better people for others in their lives and society by controlling their anger and identifying BS, like one Canadian veteran with PTSD said recently "I can cry if I want to".


Those who seek self improvements are to be commended IMO, that is not what i was objecting to, ...its the method that i disagree with. Was anyone/anything stoping the vet from crying? I would think that anyone would be free to cry if they choose to do so. What a strange statement to make....




posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: JD163

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: JD163

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: JD163

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: JD163

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: JD163

Why should I have to tell you that the best option would be to call the police?


Because step up is ambiguous and taken in this context, one would understand it as get involved. And calling the police may not be the best option. The people involved in such a hypothetical situation may not want the authorities involved.


Police are trained in handling violent situations, most of us are not. We obviously have different mindsets which your mindset is probably the most common.


True, cops are trained to handle violent encounters, but your whole premise is that the violence must be stop, one way or another, not everyone agrees with that. And having different mindset is a good thing IMO, unless you prefer that we are all clones and think the same way,....how dull would life be?


I wasn't discussing strictly violence must stop, but rather learning how societal programming feeds into toxic behaviour, lack of anger control, etc. of which young (mostly) men and women in colleges obviously need help with because of many issues, one of them includes violence.


Its also the societal programming narrative that people object to, what you are talking about is people with impulse control issues, people behave differently and would react differently, and pretending that we can teach people not to get angry/why they get angry is hilarious at best. Anger is an emotion that everyone experiences,.....its how you deal with it that matters.....this 'learning how societal programming feeds into toxic behaviour' ...its telling people that your anger issues are due to an external influence, its society fault you can't control yourself...I would much rather that people owned up to their actions and take responsibility instead of feeding them some made up social construct BS


And you are free to disagree and keep whatever behaviours you want to keep, but for those who want to be better people for others in their lives and society by controlling their anger and identifying BS, like one Canadian veteran with PTSD said recently "I can cry if I want to".


Those who seek self improvements are to be commended IMO, that is not what i was objecting to, ...its the method that i disagree with. Was anyone/anything stoping the vet from crying? I would think that anyone would be free to cry if they choose to do so. What a strange statement to make....


Yes, he mentioned the BS programming.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: JD163

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: JD163

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: JD163

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: JD163

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: JD163

Why should I have to tell you that the best option would be to call the police?


Because step up is ambiguous and taken in this context, one would understand it as get involved. And calling the police may not be the best option. The people involved in such a hypothetical situation may not want the authorities involved.


Police are trained in handling violent situations, most of us are not. We obviously have different mindsets which your mindset is probably the most common.


True, cops are trained to handle violent encounters, but your whole premise is that the violence must be stop, one way or another, not everyone agrees with that. And having different mindset is a good thing IMO, unless you prefer that we are all clones and think the same way,....how dull would life be?


I wasn't discussing strictly violence must stop, but rather learning how societal programming feeds into toxic behaviour, lack of anger control, etc. of which young (mostly) men and women in colleges obviously need help with because of many issues, one of them includes violence.


Its also the societal programming narrative that people object to, what you are talking about is people with impulse control issues, people behave differently and would react differently, and pretending that we can teach people not to get angry/why they get angry is hilarious at best. Anger is an emotion that everyone experiences,.....its how you deal with it that matters.....this 'learning how societal programming feeds into toxic behaviour' ...its telling people that your anger issues are due to an external influence, its society fault you can't control yourself...I would much rather that people owned up to their actions and take responsibility instead of feeding them some made up social construct BS


And you are free to disagree and keep whatever behaviours you want to keep, but for those who want to be better people for others in their lives and society by controlling their anger and identifying BS, like one Canadian veteran with PTSD said recently "I can cry if I want to".


Those who seek self improvements are to be commended IMO, that is not what i was objecting to, ...its the method that i disagree with. Was anyone/anything stoping the vet from crying? I would think that anyone would be free to cry if they choose to do so. What a strange statement to make....


Yes, he mentioned the BS programming.


He was programmed by society not to cry? Isn't crying expressing an emotion that is uncontrollable? overcome by sadness for example? If crying is not being able to control your emotions, how could any programming( whatever that means) stop him from doing so in the first place? Nothing was stopping him from crying,....he was just afraid of how he would be view by the public if he cried, and was seeking justification to cry when non was needed.

What programs like the one discuss here, seeks to change peoples perception on what masculinity is suppose to be,.....a redefinition on what certain people think masculinity should be....who are they to decide on that? and to label whatever aspects that you disagree with as toxic is just pure arrogance....therefore the 'resistance' as you call it.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: JD163

How many military soldiers do you think openly cry among themselves?



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: JD163

How many military soldiers do you think openly cry among themselves?



Could it be that men who sign up for the military tends to handle their emotion better? How is that an issue at all I wonder? And how is that important in any way? It you are the type to cry, you would, if you are not, then you don't. If you lose control of your emotions,....nothing can stop you from crying. And if you do break down and cry, you have no control of how you are viewed by the public. What you seek to do is convince the public at large that it is ok for men to break down and cry,..it is ok insofar as it is not illegal....cry if you must...just that men in general would never consider crying as a masculine trait.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 01:44 PM
link   
a reply to: JD163

That was the point he was making...BS programming.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 01:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: JD163

That was the point he was making...BS programming.



What point? That he want other men to see crying as manly? You are free to cry....what you have no control of is how others would view you....and what is the problem? That people should think in a certain way?
edit on 20-1-2017 by JD163 because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-1-2017 by JD163 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: JD163

He gets it NOW, I get it, the many bright minds of the colleges get it, as I am sure many others; baby steps.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 02:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: JD163

He gets it NOW, I get it, the many bright minds of the colleges get it, as I am sure many others; baby steps.


He needed someone to tell him what he could do? or could not do? Are you saying that people, or men in general are too dumb to know that? Its not rocket science,...men don't cry usually because men tends to handle emotions better, and if you fail to do so, people will view you in a certain way......what is there to teach? After attending such courses, other men will still view you the same if you break down before or after such course...... Men are not unaware of why we don't cry, and to say that we needed to be taught as such is an insult.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: JD163

You go on believing whatever you are comfortable believing, others see a better way.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

This isn't 1993. If you punch someone, you're likely to get shot in the head, or stabbed these days. "In defense".

Even in 1993, people were talking around like introvert, saying this isn't 1986.


Anyone at this point in society that is aggregating verbal arguments to physicality need to be put down like the hormone loaded horses they are.

There's a lot of issues with the 'Alpha-Male', to start let's talk about when it's appropriate to punch someone over words? My suggestion is: Never.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 02:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: ROBOTNINJADRAGON
a reply to: seasonal

This isn't 1993. If you punch someone, you're likely to get shot in the head, or stabbed these days. "In defense".

Even in 1993, people were talking around like introvert, saying this isn't 1986.


Anyone at this point in society that is aggregating verbal arguments to physicality need to be put down like the hormone loaded horses they are.

There's a lot of issues with the 'Alpha-Male', to start let's talk about when it's appropriate to punch someone over words? My suggestion is: Never.


You get it.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: JD163

You go on believing whatever you are comfortable believing, others see a better way.


Of course I would,....better? again by whose standard? Its this condescending attitude that you have some sort of moral high ground, to classify whatever you disapprove as toxic and the audacity to expect others to behave in a manner you approve ....and you wonder why people reject this nonsense



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: JD163

It is not a moral high ground that is in question, it is denial of the toxic behaviours ingrained in men and women, but if it makes you feel better to throw mud, I understand where it is coming from even if you don't.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 02:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: JD163

It is not a moral high ground that is in question, it is denial of the toxic behaviours ingrained in men and women, but if it makes you feel better to throw mud, I understand where it is coming from even if you don't.


Claiming that people are in denial, and you understand but not others,....ffs, its just that others don't see things your way,....not that we don't get it,...we're not buying it.

There is no denial, people know that there are people who would behave violently,....you seem to think that you can convince a person that is prone to violence to change his/her ways.....like you can educate the violence of of a person,...why not try to educate kids that drugs are bad?...oh yea, we tried.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: JD163

It is a form of denial when one rejects facing or refusing to accept others' perceptions that their behaviours are toxic, in the form of harassing, bullying, sexist, violent, or what have you. But you and I will not agree and that is okay. You just be who you want to be and good luck.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Toxic masculinity = exactly what our rulers fear..

Masculine testosterone filled men.. warriors that are ready to put corrupt rulers to the sword over injustices is what we need.. Not pansy mangirls under the delusion that being ashamed of and suppressing their masculinity makes them more enlightened or more attractive to liberal women.. Some loser white knight types..

That's what they want.. That total wuss without any masculine self-confidence that will fold over every time. People should study some history, I'm no historian but I know a thing or two. Feminizing men has been used as a tactical stratagem against the people more than once historically..

You liberals are simply being obedient slaves and useful idiots by subscribing to this relativistic gender brainwashing. The joke's on you fools.

I can't understand why women don't stop going out with liberal men en masse.. at this point I would think it's starting to become embarrassing identifying with such a pussy ideology. I mean, I don't even know if you can call yourself a real man if you're a liberal at this point. It's like.. where's your self-respect as a man? You're not just some tabula rasa blank slate on which you can paint whatever damned gender you want. You're a god damn man and you should act as one. And that real man certificate comes with certain responsibilities and that includes being stabbed to death by samurais while defending your family or overthrowing a corrupt government that needs to be dealt with. Or purging a country of traitorous liberal fifth columnist elements.

I just can't bring myself to respecting a liberal man.. not this liberalism.. not the liberalism of 2017..



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

You psycho feminist women do not get to tell us men how to be masculine.. Ok? Let's get that straight right off the bat. Otherwise we men are going to have to redefine femininity according to our own tastes, and I assure you you wouldn't like that. It would only be fair right?. But in reality as with this prime example of feminist lunacy that would be absurd.

So back off.. Or we're gonna have a problem. Like you lunatics hadn't already poked the bear for years. Earth to reality detached feminists: we do have a problem. Feminists have been bashing and attacking men ever since it gained a foothold in the mainstream. You picked a fight with us and we're gonna end that now. Feminism has emerged in the 21st century as one of the most toxic ideologies of our time. It has done untold damage and has single handedly ruined gender relations all throughout the West. It has served our rulers and have essentially divided the populace along yet another dialectic..

You think men will be like: "Yeah, we're gonna be woman now. Great." No, only those that lack sufficient will power would ever fall under the brainwashing spell of third wave feminism.. You're not gonna get a bunch of emasculated boygirls in the end, you're gonna get a masculine barbarian uprising in tandem with fascism, authoritarianism and nationalism. Look at what you liberals have done.. Trump rode to the white house on a wave of bigotry simply because people are so tired of you people.

Good luck with that. And do pray that society does not collapse. Cause no pussy #boys are going to survive that and you women will be the property of roaming bands of techno barbarians.. Well, it's not as civilised as a society filled with neutered men but it sure is exciting.



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 01:01 AM
link   
a reply to: DeadMoonJester

"I can't understand why women don't stop going out with liberal men en masse."

Their shopping bags ain't carrying itself



posted on Jan, 21 2017 @ 04:22 AM
link   
a reply to: InTheLight

"It is a form of denial when one rejects facing or refusing to accept others' perceptions that their behaviours are toxic"

In simple english, agree with me or you are in denial.......ffs listen to yourself

"in the form of harassing, bullying, sexist, violent, or what have you"

Its called Anti-social behaviour, and people who engage in it are suffering from Antisocial personality disorder

"pseudo toxic masculinity"

Its a mental disorder, so even if men are 3500% more like to suffer from this condition....its not some secret 'society programming' conspiracy thing going on ....or do you also think that mental disorders are a social construct?

No amount of safe space and play doh can change that, and yes, we know that victims of such people suffer, some even in silence,.....but trying to social shame the problem away is not the solution,...those mental patients either don't care or can't control their behaviour ....

Ah damn it...I give up,...you win

Down with patriarchy! Down with patriarchy! Down with patriarchy! Gal Pawah!




top topics



 
18
<< 19  20  21    23 >>

log in

join