Rolling Maleness and Masculinity Discussion Thread

facial hair: uncomfortable, mild dysphoria. shaving: tedious, nick this same damn mole on my face 2/3 of the time. laser: intimidating, unknown.

Seems like a couple millimeters shouldn’t make a difference but it does.

the suffering of shaving is the feeling of toxic masculinity leaving the body

Laser hair removal on your face sounds painful

that's bc it removes so much of the toxicity in one go only the strongest humans can bare it

take a break Mordy

silby, I know there are some numbing creams that people use before laser hair removal. I preferred the digging my nails into my palms and trying to be zen method.

relax silbs - i found this great corp on the same page as you i'm just trying to hammer home the metaphysics of the situation

You guys want to talk about the new APA guidelines and really light the night on fire

?

i don't know anything about that so please give a brief description so i can weigh in peremptorily

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/10/science/apa-traditional-masculinity-harmful.html

Men are not the target audience of this ad.

That's really interesting. Do you think that this would be obvious to most people in marketing?

The guidelines, 10 in all, posit that males who are socialized to conform to “traditional masculinity ideology” are often negatively affected in terms of mental and physical health.

They acknowledge that ideas about masculinity vary across cultures, age groups and ethnicities. But they point to common themes like “anti-femininity, achievement, eschewal of the appearance of weakness, and adventure, risk, and violence.”

I agree with the analysis fwiw. I wonder what it would mean as therapy guidelines. Many dudes need more risk and adventure in their lives.

Obviously not more violence or anti-femininity.

shavings good

first shave was back in 93 iirc but i met the president in 96 and i had to pretend that was my first time cos dad was home for it and it seemed important to him

The guidelines, 10 in all, posit that males who are socialized to conform to “traditional masculinity ideology” are often negatively affected in terms of mental and physical health.

more or less than yknow anyone else like?

I’m not anti the list by any means but it was still surprising to see this kind of analysis from a neutral body like the apa

is shaving for the first time with the president a custom in yr part of the world deems

neutral? hm

The APA, complicit in torture but in a neutral way

there's no such thing as a politically neutral body but if there were APA def isn't it

Oh yeah i forgot about that. Hm

it was the first time he'd been home to spot me shaving iirc is the thing mordy

its an example of some non toxic masculinity easy now

oh the taste of yr masculinity i'm on a ride

shavings good

first shave was back in 93 iirc but i met the president in 96 and i had to pretend that was my first time cos dad was home for it and it seemed important to him

The guidelines, 10 in all, posit that males who are socialized to conform to “traditional masculinity ideology” are often negatively affected in terms of mental and physical health.

more or less than yknow anyone else like?

― topical mlady (darraghmac), Monday, January 14, 2019 2:22 PM (one minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i don't know how it is in ireland deems but suicide is the main killer of young men in scotland. a common refrain after someone jumps in the clyde is "we never knew he was struggling". the causal link between "being a man" in the traditional masculinist sense and bad mental health would seem fairly clear

also if many of these men would "open up" to their pals they would be told to fuck off or stop being bent

i think that's true. a lot of "confessional" behavior that one might imagine as an alternative to bottling up yr feelings is similarly arrested full of toxicities so many ppl are addicted to their complaint narratives compulsively returning to them again and again. there's a healthy kind of confessional/confidence but ppl will need to be taught that it's not simple enough to say "don't bottle it in" ppl have to know how to communicate + theorize their suffering in productive ways. (neither repression nor magnification etc)

i agree mordy. it's a careful balance--it's good to know when to ask for help, but the goal has to be emotional self regulation. also i am a big believer in therapy because if you try to open up all the time to your friends that is going to be taxing on those friendships.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/10/science/apa-traditional-masculinity-harmful.html

― Trϵϵship, Monday, 14 January 2019 22:18 (eight minutes ago) Permalink

lol, traditional masculinity may be harmful. For example, here is a stock photo of a high school basketball team.

its the leading cause here too jim

im not sure that youve linked it to traditional masculinity vs a v rapid pivot from same and a constant barrage of negativity of p much any form of self determined masculinity

but idk.

tbh I blame capitalism either way

def!

and im not saying the pivot didnt need to happen neither fwiw but im not sure that either the vacuum or the numerous advocated alternatives arent a major input into young male suicide figures (skewed heavily rural here also which is imo relevant)

i don't really feel like the pivot away from traditional masculinity has gotten up much steam when I'm back home in lanarkshire in the pub tbh.

"'Men are not the target audience of this ad.'

"That's really interesting. Do you think that this would be obvious to most people in marketing?"

I think so, particularly if they know about Procter & Gamble's strategy. (Part of my partner's job is knowing something about the personal care business world.) But there are some clues in the ad itself, especially the longform version -- showing the existing slogan in low-res video and then having an act of violence burst through it is a pretty on-the-nose way to do a re-branding, failing to show any men that male viewers would want to be until Terry Crews appears halfway in-- until that point, the men shown are pensive, victimized, or victimizers, while the women in the first half are shown being strong or tough or nurturing even in the face of victimization. Even importing Terry Crews from another P&G brand to Gillette says something. Corporations as large about P&G have to know about public attitudes to a million billion things, but they only ever want to change public attitudes on three types of things: attitudes toward political decisions that benefit their shareholders, attitudes toward their brands, and attitudes toward their products -- and they never ever ever want target markets to feel bad about themselves. This ad would make marketing sense if P&G no longer wants separate branding for Gillette and Gillette for Women.

i think any man watching that as would know right away it's not targeted to them, it's feminist porn. it even has a superhero foiling an in progress sexual assault (the brave man who stops his friend from looking at SMH attractive passerby). 10/10

*an, not SMH

I am not qualified to comment on the larger politics here, but I will say that I hate shaving AND I hate having a beard about equally. It is a continual cycle of annoyance. I probably deserve it.

i have that thing where if i have a beard i look like the daguerreotype of a civil war casualty and if i'm clean-shaven i look like a slightly weathered child, but if i have a moderately unshaven look it works. it's a delicate balance.

I think i’m always going to keep the scruff. I did clean shaven a few weeks ago and i had to admit it didn’t look like me.

I've been totally clean-shaven twice in the last 36 years and couldn't get that beard back fast enough.

the worst thing about the gillette ad is the men on twitter vigorously congratulating themselves for not being one of the men on twitter who's offended by the gillette ad

My mom just e-mailed this to me noting how “I have my work cut out for me as a father” lol

"'Men are not the target audience of this ad.'

"That's really interesting. Do you think that this would be obvious to most people in marketing?"

I think so, particularly if they know about Procter & Gamble's strategy. (Part of my partner's job is knowing something about the personal care business world.) But there are some clues in the ad itself, especially the longform version -- showing the existing slogan in low-res video and then having an act of violence burst through it is a pretty on-the-nose way to do a re-branding, failing to show any men that male viewers would want to be until Terry Crews appears halfway in-- until that point, the men shown are pensive, victimized, or victimizers, while the women in the first half are shown being strong or tough or nurturing even in the face of victimization. Even importing Terry Crews from another P&G brand to Gillette says something. Corporations as large about P&G have to know about public attitudes to a million billion things, but they only ever want to change public attitudes on three types of things: attitudes toward political decisions that benefit their shareholders, attitudes toward their brands, and attitudes toward their products -- and they never ever ever want target markets to feel bad about themselves. This ad would make marketing sense if P&G no longer wants separate branding for Gillette and Gillette for Women.

― Three Word Username, Monday, January 14, 2019 6:23 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Any source for this other than inside info? It's interesting but it would be nice to have a (non-breitbart) article or something like that making that case

is there a brietbart article making the case? it does seem likely that insulting your customers or inveighing against them to be less shitty are not great strategies if your intention is to sell them a product. what's the alternative? that they're a corporation moved by social responsibility and they're willing to alienate some of their customers in order to "make a difference"?

https://goat.com.au/metoo/gillettes-anti-toxic-masculinity-ad-is-so-sharp-that-of-course-its-cut-toxic-men-deep?fbclid=IwAR1OggiwUqIHfojyOxwyxKLbFk4kAoegEMZKLMICAx3vQTTgZG9lCLgGbvI

Something a fb friend posted from Au.

ppl who are normally skeptical of corporate motivations esp when it comes to promotion and advertising (not saying this is anyone in particular, just as a general statement) probably shouldn't suspend that skepticism just bc they like the message

facial hair: uncomfortable, mild dysphoria. shaving: tedious, nick this same damn mole on my face 2/3 of the time. laser: intimidating, unknown.

― I have measured out my life in coffee shop loyalty cards (silby), Monday, January 14, 2019 3:07 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

once again silby and i are on the same page

Meanwhile, one brave advertiser senses an opportunity:

Ball Deodorant: Sometimes the best inventions are the most obvious! You put deodorant under your arms, doesn't it make sense to put it on down there? Your balls will thank you → https://t.co/JX5CsVG8jG pic.twitter.com/RvyhpLXgjl

— Manscaped (@manscaped) December 18, 2018

perfect for marketing of masculinity