I noticed that they seem to be the politically correct term for liberals and its so strange. What is the ideology at work here? What does "identity" even mean in this context?
I noticed that they seem to be the politically correct term for liberals and its so strange. What is the ideology at work here? What does "identity" even mean in this context?
wouldn't this therefore mean that a man who rejects toxic masculinity could accurately be called not a man as they aren't practicing aspects of what culturally defines a man because that sounds wrong
In this framework there is no such thing as “a man” but rather “being a man.”
But to answer your actual question I think proponents of this view would ask you to think about it like this: if a professor vindictively fails you for correctly contradicting them, did you really fail?
Certainly it’s possible to be in a situation where the Other’s understanding of manhood contradicts one’s understanding of themselves. But important to remember you’re only “not acting as man” in this person’s understanding or within your shared understanding with this person. So they can only really accurately say “you’re not a man to me.” This is the case with everyone.
not sure about this theory as it doesn't explain my lived experience of gender or how I have seen gender work as a cultural factor
That's the conflict I guess.
At some point, the culture can change. Things once seen as "not being a man" can be seen as "being a man". Or a person can find themselves in a different culture where the definition of "being a man" has a different set of criteria.