Debating the existence of toxic masculinity/femininity

ren wrote: Taoism isn't dualist. The yin/yang is the idea that apparent opposites are in fact one with the whole.

It's all essentially advaita vendanta, under a different name.

Yes, I think that's what I said. The paradox of apparent duality that is actually monism.

We as humans often use the word - “like” to better understand things and associate ideas or thoughts... not that they are ... they are - like-

ren wrote: Taoism isn't dualist. The yin/yang is the idea that apparent opposites are in fact one with the whole.

It's all essentially advaita vendanta, under a different name.

Yea I tend to agree... but I'd go further, and as systems of practice (and belief) they serve as mechanism's to parse mental conceptualization to approach that AFAIK. The terminology IMO used most often is not prescriptive to dualist concepts, but the interaction of concepts in dualistic dynamics. Such they are often not meant to be so prescriptive... though that might be a good 'real' definition of a right hand path, puppetting old dogmatic view vs understanding the root intent (and either leveraging that to unconventional purpose or historical insight). But I don't intend to argue to redefine those concepts because people love the dark is bad and powerful angle too much to consider that only applies to those full of fear or trying to sell something to people full of fear (fear being synonymous with ignorance)

I (think I) agree dualism is more of a built-in feature for humans. Boy/girl, up/down, left/right. Everything for us a something or a not-something, black or white. Especially in jedi circles actually. People have reverted to their animal emotions and thoughts. The idea of brahman as the force appears dead, the search for the truth behind appearances long gone.

Ren I totally agree with you in a sense. That said, I don't know much of the communities outside of this one (TOTJO for life even if I don't agree or am uncomfortable in situations that sometimes arise) but the point I disagree with is people are still searching for the truth behind things. It's just people are not asking the questions that lead to that deeper truth. What those questions are varies from person to person. I can't tell you why people won't ask the questions they need to get to a deeper level but it is not outside their abilities. In fact as I have been typing this I would put it more as people are looking for the question to be presented to them that doesn't make them only look beyond that surface, as opposed to asking themselves the harder questions.

In a way sometime you have to ask yourself something like this, does a 6yr care about the meaning of any of these terms? Most likely not (coaching aside from the very extreme parents). So, I would put forth and it's one of the purposes of the questions, terms and goal of those responsible for their creation. Sociologist do a great job at observing society and coming up with terms to define phenomenon, they however, seldom consider the consequences of their own study. This adds to the fact that social adaption of ideologies is seldom easy or for that matter doesn't without the actual ideology having a purpose besides their own personal gain or status in life (people often grasp the surface meaning and movement because it is the easy way).

Much Love, Respect and Peace,
Kobos

Saw on the book of faces.

Toxic masculinity is defined as when a man feels compelled to prove or reinforce his perceived manhood through unhealthy means- often harmful to others, but just as often, themselves.
They will often mask their insecurities by attacking or degrading other men who don't "measure up" to their warped ideas of "manhood". They have really unhealthy ideas and attitudes about what being a man is, and the "masculine" sectors of society are responsible for this.
It's a thing.

"Toxic Femininity", on the other hand? Well, that's a "yes and no", but mostly no. The latest trend in bad debate tactics is "what about"-isms, in this case, defending a negative by deflecting onto a suggested opposite negative, the latest example being the insistence that there exists an "alt-Left" in American politics. It relies on people just accepting the flawed logic that one bad thing surely must have a similarly bad but opposite counterpart.
"False equivalence" is another good term to apply here, because it doesn't really fit when you try to present these as two sides of the same coin.
Here's the thing- the best I can imagine for the image of "Toxic Femininity" is not "Toxic Masculinity, but for Women", because that implies there exists a female driven clone of "Toxic Masculinity". it's "Internalized Misogyny"; When a woman, having absorbed misogynist ideas or concepts, and would seek to judge other women or police their behavior on men's behalf, with men's interests in mind (on account of pursuing a mysoginist, rather than feminist, goal/s).
You see the issue? It's not the opposite, because the source of the problem is largely the same, due to a large overlap between Toxic Masculinity and Misogyny, with similar goals in mind; control and domination, the only distinction being who they seek to control.
Yes, it's a negative thing, but it's not something truly comparable to Toxic Masculinity, due to the overly similar nature of it.

There, I've saved people some google searches and 14 pages of reading.

Why is this male pathetic? He is clearly toxic but i wouldnt say there is anything masculine about him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkrNVol0UAo

What about these girls? Theyre demonstrating “toxic” behavior: is this also the fault of the patriarchy? Let me guess, “internalized misogyny”?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frM-jUxcj2Y

Stormcaller wrote: Toxic masculinity is defined as when a man feels compelled to prove or reinforce his perceived manhood through unhealthy means- often harmful to others, but just as often, themselves.
They will often mask their insecurities by attacking or degrading other men who don't "measure up" to their warped ideas of "manhood". They have really unhealthy ideas and attitudes about what being a man is, and the "masculine" sectors of society are responsible for this.
It's a thing.

"Toxic Femininity", on the other hand? Well, that's a "yes and no", but mostly no. The latest trend in bad debate tactics is "what about"-isms, in this case, defending a negative by deflecting onto a suggested opposite negative, the latest example being the insistence that there exists an "alt-Left" in American politics. It relies on people just accepting the flawed logic that one bad thing surely must have a similarly bad but opposite counterpart.
"False equivalence" is another good term to apply here, because it doesn't really fit when you try to present these as two sides of the same coin.
Here's the thing- the best I can imagine for the image of "Toxic Femininity" is not "Toxic Masculinity, but for Women", because that implies there exists a female driven clone of "Toxic Masculinity". it's "Internalized Misogyny"; When a woman, having absorbed misogynist ideas or concepts, and would seek to judge other women or police their behavior on men's behalf, with men's interests in mind (on account of pursuing a mysoginist, rather than feminist, goal/s).
You see the issue? It's not the opposite, because the source of the problem is largely the same, due to a large overlap between Toxic Masculinity and Misogyny, with similar goals in mind; control and domination, the only distinction being who they seek to control.
Yes, it's a negative thing, but it's not something truly comparable to Toxic Masculinity, due to the overly similar nature of it.

There, I've saved people some google searches and 14 pages of reading.

You saved nothing, the purpose of this thread is not to paraphrase tumblr's definition of 'toxic masculinity'....

And this isn't Temple of the Social Justice Warrior.

You present the extremist view that some people's nature/personality is unhealthy or toxic to themselves and society, yet this ideology you present is new and untested and its proponents do not appear gifted at reproduction... Prior to the apparition of this ideology there's a 1.2 billion years long record showing the success of sexual characteristics.