Seriously the stories I've read about dudes threatening to drive to womens house and murder them or something over rejections is insane.

Have any of the ladies here had to deal with a psychopath like that?

  • keepcarrot [she/her]
    ·
    5 months ago

    I think there's a pile. None of this is to say that anyone "owes" someone a relationship or that an individual man isn't making some sort of a choice when he goes off the rails and stalks me for several years. (this is also about cishet men)

    I also want to say that this is going to appear in individual men different amounts. If you're a man and you reflexively think "well, I don't X", that's fine. But take it on board and think seriously (possibly with a therapist) whether parts of this do exist in you the next time you're rejected or whatever. This is a rough broad cultural commentary, which is fuzzy as hell. It is also done to boys and men (by other boys and men, and sometimes by women, if that takes some of the sting away).

    Most bad: Under patriarchal norms, there is a sense of ownership of a woman (a specific woman, rather than women generally) in our language of relationship. This has been more explicit in the past, but it's still there in our media, "thought leaders" etc. Obviously, no guy says it and often they can't even sus out their feeling. It happens early in courting, well before any sort of exclusivity or even much social contact. The sting of rejection sucks, sure, but that you'd take it beyond your immediate feelings and wander around after a person requires some sense of... "This person is mine". This thought pattern is pervasive and unaddressed and causes, I think, most of the violence against women (you wouldn't want your property running away from you, your toaster doesn't talk back to you etc). I think this is worth delving into more specifically than just "male entitlement to women's bodies" (which other people have written about a bunch)

    Also bad: Men in our society are in a competitive hierarchy. You want to be taken seriously by your friends? Well, maybe they'd stop making fun of you if you had a hot partner. Again, this is something a lot of guys will not say, but a lot of "choosing" a partner is about what they think their friends (and powerful men around them) would say. They might be fine with someone chubby or trans or whatever, but a voice in the back of their head says "But I know Robert will make fun of me for this". This applies more the further down the hierarchy of masculinity you are, the further you are from being taken seriously in that sphere. While the first point applies to men pretty well across the board, this definitely has a classist ableist character. See the dating foibles of masc computer science students.

    Bad, related to the first two: Men, as a class, feel entitled to women. Myriad reasons, as caregivers and sources of offspring. In our modern liberal nation-states, there's always an obsession with birthrates. In prior generations, familial lines and property inheritance promoted... Well, men owning women, both as a class and as individuals. However, any individual man being under the effects of this doesn't necessarily feel that entitlement. Some definitely do, see the prevalence of cat-calling. Some do without cat-calling (say, a handsy boss). Other people have written more about this and better than I could.

    More innocent on the part of men, but still bad societally: Men are more isolated than women. I realise that men have more access to power and privilege than women in this society, however men are also divorced from both their internal feelings and their communities in a way women (often) aren't. If you think about the typical men's friend circle, it's often mediated almost entirely around common hobbies and a once-common space (school, uni), and the conversations tend to be surface level and avoid anything particularly rough. There's an emphasis on never backing down from a position, lest one lose their position in the aforementioned hierarchy, which means that any interpersonal emotional discussions are very high labour and high risk. This is isolating. The most acceptable way to access that sort of connection is through a romantic relationship, for men at least. Women do sometimes experience this, but to a lesser degree. Men are also raised to have few emotions. Realistically, this means they still have those emotions but do not understand them well and outwardly try to express rage, glee, or lust (the real man emotions that aren't really emotions and you can express them without anyone lest yourself doubt your manly stoicism).

    Unmet social needs: I had someone get on my case about calling them social needs, but that's the psych language. It's not going to kill you like not breathing, but it will kill you like smoking and drinking. People have romantic, platonic, and physical affection needs that a lot of single men are not getting met at all. While it's not on any one woman or women generally to fix this, it is something that does need addressing. Traditionally, everyone would be a part of a community which would meet quite a lot of these needs, but we live in a very isolated society. Whatever else, these unmet needs causes a lot of extremely weird behaviour even outside of harrassing women. That isn't to say that a solid community wouldn't have any of these problems (e.g. peasant communities in many places are very patriarchal), just to say it would have less of our current weirdos.

    Ancillary: Sub-section for relatively surface level things that nonetheless cause a lot of these interactions and reflect a lot of the above. However, they can be changed by producing different media etc.

    • Terrible dating advice. idk, there's lots out there and where else does one turn to? Women? They're illogical and don't know what they want! (also they want different things, and this is confusing and enraging)
    • Social scripts. If you're poorly socialised, you often rely on movies and "success stories" to provide you with scripts of what to do. I see this amongst isolated autistic boys a lot. They do have agency, but frankly even "woke" romance stories are not particularly good at showing how to deal with rejection.

    And obviously, some men are sociopaths and do stuff because they can get away with it. But that's actually pretty rare (1 in 25? idk).

    I don't really have a good answer. I know that modern "trad values" masculinity basically wants more of this (with a side dressing of idealised yeomanry). Suburbia destroys community by making us competitive (lawn measuring) and making everything very far away. We only really encounter bastard forms of community in modern society that have had to be recreated from the ground up with people who've been raised with very hierarchical military/prison rules (corporations and schools), and a lot of the stronger "communities" we encounter in urban life are reactionary. :( Be the best man you can be though.

    I also don't think ceding this entire ground to reactionaries is the right choice, even if I think that most of "masculinity" is at the very least silly and arbitrary. Kinda like how I'm definitely an internationalist that would get rejected from any nationalist project, people are attached to their nations and its within "The Left"s best interest to be able to work through and address the topic without alienating a huge number of people.

    • wopazoo [he/him]
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      GOOD post

      More innocent on the part of men, but still bad societally: Men are more isolated than women. I realise that men have more access to power and privilege than women in this society, however men are also divorced from both their internal feelings and their communities in a way women (often) aren't. If you think about the typical men's friend circle, it's often mediated almost entirely around common hobbies and a once-common space (school, uni), and the conversations tend to be surface level and avoid anything particularly rough. There's an emphasis on never backing down from a position, lest one lose their position in the aforementioned hierarchy, which means that any interpersonal emotional discussions are very high labour and high risk. This is isolating. The most acceptable way to access that sort of connection is through a romantic relationship, for men at least. Women do sometimes experience this, but to a lesser degree. Men are also raised to have few emotions. Realistically, this means they still have those emotions but do not understand them well and outwardly try to express rage, glee, or lust (the real man emotions that aren't really emotions and you can express them without anyone lest yourself doubt your manly stoicism).

      this part is very accurate and well-spoken

    • kristina [she/her]
      ·
      5 months ago

      Also bad: Men in our society are in a competitive hierarchy. You want to be taken seriously by your friends? Well, maybe they'd stop making fun of you if you had a hot partner. Again, this is something a lot of guys will not say, but a lot of "choosing" a partner is about what they think their friends (and powerful men around them) would say. They might be fine with someone chubby or trans or whatever, but a voice in the back of their head says "But I know Robert will make fun of me for this". This applies more the further down the hierarchy of masculinity you are, the further you are from being taken seriously in that sphere. While the first point applies to men pretty well across the board, this definitely has a classist ableist character. See the dating foibles of masc computer science students.

      i feel like this also goes both ways in some way. i have family and people in general take me more seriously (both as a trans person and as a woman) when i have my bf, a masc hot guy, around. so in a way i can leech off of his hotness and our relationship to make people take me more seriously (re: doctors not listening to women except with a man in the room and so on). so bizarre.

    • barrbaric [he/him]
      ·
      5 months ago

      Overall great post, and this in particular is 100% accurate.

      If you think about the typical men's friend circle, it's often mediated almost entirely around common hobbies and a once-common space (school, uni), and the conversations tend to be surface level and avoid anything particularly rough.

      How would you describe the typical women's friend circle?

      As for what is to be done... I personally think the concept of masculinity has so much baggage that we have to reject it and look for something beyond it.

      • BrezhnevsEyebrows [he/him]
        ·
        5 months ago

        I don't think we have to reject the idea of masculinity altogether but I do think we have to reject our current understanding of masculinity and start over so to speak

        • barrbaric [he/him]
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          I'm guessing we mostly agree and that at the end of the day it comes down to semantics. Not much difference between disavowing all the qualities of masculinity as understood in modern culture in favor of new positive masculinity vs disavowing masculinity itself in favor of Masculinity 2.

          • BrezhnevsEyebrows [he/him]
            ·
            5 months ago

            Sorry, when you said "something beyond" I wasn't sure what you meant so I thought I'd add my 2 cents. I completely agree with you

      • keepcarrot [she/her]
        ·
        5 months ago

        So, we all live in the same liberal shit pit, women's friends circles will have some of the things I listed to some degree. There are often unspoken hierarchies that go unaddressed. However, women have a few things better in their social relationships:

        • Women are generally more open to sharing their emotions about relationships with each other, specifically about each other and their mutual connections.
        • Women are generally more open to complimenting each other about almost everything. With men, while there might be compliments, they are often in jest or pulled in a way that means compliments wind up either being jokes or insincere. Not saying men don't at all, and sometimes I see that changing among guy friends, but it's a very stark difference. The internet trend of "I got complimented once about my shirt 5 years ago and now its tatters" speaks volumes.
        • Women de-escalate more. Always a generality, but paired with the first point it means that compromising or dealing with their emotional problems with each other means that their relationships and connections are deeper.
        • Women do more platonic physical contact. idk what to say
        • Women are more eager to be vulnerable with each other. Not just the negative things (e.g. I like the same person you like), but eager to get unashamedly excited in a really physical way with their friends. If we think about the average cishet man, how often do they do a happy dance and hug one (or all) of their friends because one of their favourite songs came on? This is something that the anglosphere specifically is worse for (e.g. latAm are very open about singing and dancing as part of their masculinity). I am stereotyping here a bit and the example is a bit trite, but I hope you see what I mean

        I want to be clear, both men and women do all of the things I've described here and in the original post. It's just a case of probabilities and why we feel like we're in an epidemic of "male loneliness" (masc loneliness? I honestly don't hear trans dudes discussing this, but maybe I'll ask).

        Also to both men and women, it's unlikely to "fix" one individual man on your own (and really, you shouldn't approach relationships that way), it's not up to any one individual to fix men generally. If you are a man in your video game circle and you try to make the entire group be more open with their feelings, you're probably going to get burned out and even if semi-successful if you take a break the boys are probably going to fall back into their ways.

        As for what is to be done... I personally think the concept of masculinity has so much baggage that we have to reject it and look for something beyond it.

        Part of me agrees, but I don't think its remotely a resolved issue, either for me or "the left".

    • bigboopballs [he/him]
      ·
      5 months ago

      these unmet needs causes a lot of extremely weird behaviour even outside of harrassing women.

      like what?

      • keepcarrot [she/her]
        ·
        5 months ago

        Getting into scraps online because it's the only form of socialisation they can get where they get any validation (through either people agreeing with them or feeling superior to the people they're arguing with). Lurching wildly from social group to social group to get that initial high of meeting new people attention. Alcoholism. Breaking keyboards and mice due to losing at video games and then continuing to play those video games (and losing a bunch). Typically, a lot of behaviours that mean they remain isolated even if they don't necessarily do anything untoward. You can probably think of a bunch of examples off the top of your head. It is self perpetuating to a degree.

        I would be cautious about this topic since some things that would come to mind are arbitrarily culturally/class defined (maintaining a nice haircut, wearing suits etc), and some are autistic traits. I'd want to focus primarily on behaviours that harm social relationships that wouldn't be performed if they had all their social needs met. Obviously, men are neither trained to handle this well nor recognise it within themselves.