No, it's not true. Not in the way that those are constructed in the Man Box contex - which is exactly what she's claiming. She says that those things really aren't so bad in certain situations, and that men are somehow "losing their identity" when these behaviors are criticized as the toxic shit that they actually are. But all of those things demonstrably are hugely problematic and pretending they aren't in order to pander to men isn't helpful. Men need to lose that particular identity for their own good and the good of the culture (and to be honest, the world).
Having good control of your emotions is not the same as being stoic (in the way that term is used by most men, which has almost nothing to do with actual Stoicism, the philosophy). She (and you) are talking about repressing your emotions, which is very unhealthy. Of course, there is a place for competition in the world in a healthy way, but that's not what competitiveness means in this context. The fact that you both are opining about things you don't know enough about to comment on isn't my fault or my problem. Are you going to let uninformed amateurs make false statements about your area of expertise without correction? 🙄 I highly doubt it.
And NO, the APA specifically calls all of those out as harmful to men - and everyone else - because they are.
"The main thrust of the subsequent research is that traditional masculinity—marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression—is, on the whole, harmful. Men socialized in this way are less likely to engage in healthy behaviors."
In 96% of studies, cultural norms of masculinity seemed to increase suicide risk. Cultural norms of masculinity refer to expectations for how men should behave in specific communities or cultures. Our study identified the following norms as potentially elevating male suicide risk: suppression of emotions, pressure for men to succeed, and diminishing men's needs for relationships.
“We tell boys to “Man up.” We tell boys, “Don’t be a sissy.” But what we’re really communicating is “Don’t be female, because female is less.” Wrongly gendering the universal capacity for human connection as feminine and then shaming boys to see feminine as less is how we block our sons from the trial and error process of growing their powerful relational capacities, leading to a lifetime of loneliness. Loneliness which in turn leads to dramatically higher rates of cancer, heart disease, diabetes, Alzheimer's Disease, obesity, and more for men.
At a time when boys should be expressing and constructing their identities in more diverse, grounded, and authentic ways, they are brutally conditioned to suppress authentic expression and instead cleave closely to the expression of male privilege as identity. Locker room talk and the denigration of women become central to proving they are “real men” in their social circles.”
There was NO nuance in this essay. I was responding to exactly that. You trying to invent or imply it because you'd like her to be right is again, not my fault or my problem, because she really, really isn't. MYOB unless you actually have something substantive to offer that is more than your own personal unsupported beliefs.
