Is masculinity aggressive/violent?

post removed

Scroll to see replies

Elliot Rodgers was hardly 'masculine' and yes he was a mad ~~man~~ boy. He even stated the fact he hated the typical masculine jock type figure in society.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 2

yo radical one

I think gender roles are partly rooted in biology

Also Eliot Rodgers was an effeminate Whiteknight who despised masculine men

Reply 3

slade p

yes masculinity means you do have to be violent in certain cases, and your morality guides you as to when to be violent.

Reply 4

So Instinct

Because he felt he "acted like a true gentlemen, not an obnoxious jock" however females preferred the more masculine jocks over him. He then resorted to whine, wallow in self pity and then shoot them and himself. What a masculine straight thinking boy he was.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 5

yo radical one

Original post by So Instinct

This is what I have been thinking

His actions were his fault obviously, but I genuinely believe they were an indirect result of a society which shames masculine behaviours and pretty much castrates men into bitchy eunuchs...

...like him

Reply 6

Miel Purple

Regarding Rodgers he blamed everyone but himself. It's always someone's fault

No.

This is a lie. It's everyone for themselves.

Reply 9

Comus

I don't think that masculinity (which is a really vague and inconsistent term) is inherently violent, though some people who are considered traditionally masculine are violent, there are also people who are not particularly masculine who happen to be violent.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 10

yo radical one

Original post by Armin.

This is a lie. It's everyone for themselves.

Nah

women and children first is true

Then the men should fight it out in a glorious battle royale, so only the strongest men get to live and have children after that

It's science :sexface:

Reply 11

Armin.

Original post by yo radical one

Nah

women and children first is true

Then the men should fight it out in a glorious battle royale, so only the strongest men get to live and have children after that

It's science :sexface:

I thought this too until I saw this article. [h="1"]‘Women and Children First’? On Sinking Ships, It’s Every Man for Himself[/h]

Reply 12

imtelling

In terms of inter-gender violence, virtually all of it is committed by men against women.

I started a thread yesterday linking to acts of unbelievable brutality directed against women:

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2698986

Reply 13

joey11223

Biologically it makes sense, and I'd imagine that somewhere tucked in the back of our brains is the instinctual response to carry it out, as females are worth more than males to the population/family etc than males are reproductively. I don't think it's a social construct and I doubt you'd ever be able to totally eliminate it. I'd wager in most scenarios where a guy saw a man and a woman in the same dangerous situation, they'd be drawn to save the female, for what ever reason they may fight that response and save the male, but if both were strangers, I think most would help the woman first.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 14

the mezzil

This is all I have to say to you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=5yt849wJyVk

Reply 15

browndruidess

Its is a person's understanding of masculinity that can result in them carrying out violent acts. If they believe that the only way to be a 'real man' is to overpower or dominate, then their actions will reflect their belief systems. Society influences us all, and for some, that means a warped understanding and need to prove one's 'manhood'.

Reply 16

Mequa

Original post by yo radical one

I think gender roles are partly rooted in biology

That's called the naturalistic fallacy. It's deriving "ought" statements, how men and women "should" or "ought to" act, from factual matters about the world.

It leads to absurdities, and atrocities, such as: "Men have more testosterone in general, therefore a man with less testosterone who doesn't conform to the ideal is a pussy and should be shamed and ridiculed".

I, for one, as a male, tend to become very hostile when anyone attempts to impose traditionalist gender roles on myself using shaming tactics. I'm an individual, and I reject such roles - attempting to define masculinity for me and force me to conform to their definition of it - and the people who impose them.

Reply 17

yo radical one

Original post by Mequa

Er no it isn't

It would be the naturalistic fallacy if I said, "men should act like men because it's natural". It applies to moral statements and presupposes that nature determines what is morally right.

Saying that male and female behaviour can be biologically explained, is a neutral statement (nothing to do with morality) and a testable hypothesis

Spoiler

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 18

Riku

I think gender stereotypes are damaging (see the fact I have driven myself to a bad place publicly on TSR over the matter) but only when restrictive. I do not think that men should be told to be less manly etc. I do think however that ideas such as violence=signals dominance and lack of muscles=lacks dominance=unattractive and never getting laid should stop being circulated; the latter is damaging to men's body image, sense of self and, whereas the former is damaging to society as a whole

Regarding Rodgers the fact he was unattractive had nothing to do with the fact he didn't have muscles or was 'alpha, this was his fallacy. Women reported he was pretty good looking. This is arm-chair psychology, but imo it was due to reasons such as:

-He had no social skills, which was probably not helped by having Aspergers. Of course I don't mean people with Aspergers have no social skills or are unattractive! But, by its nature, it gives some people with the condition greater initial difficulty forming and maintaining interpersonal skills and relationships. This could have been mitigated and his family tried to with therapy and support, but...
-Rodgers was resistant to improving his social skills and lived mostly in a bubble of alienated self-entitlement not helped by being privileged with a wealthy family, quite evidently trying to win friends and women's affection with money and displays of wealth e.g. his car. On top of this, he was ungrateful to his own family and took his privilege for granted.
-Obviously this failed, but he did not understand this was due to his own actions put instead took the victim approach/blamed society, even his family. Now I can understand getting annoyed with rejection especially of (and there definitely are some especially at a young age), but
-…he took this too far and developed generalised, misogynistic assumptions of all women being gold-diggers with impossibly high standards who either demand a Prince Charming/Ryan Gosling/Superman or will rip your heart and wallet out.
-Found himself identifying with the community of similarly embittered, misogynistic men online, a particularly vulnerable user considering his social isolation
-May also have had a superiority complex/narcissism judging by his videos and Manifesto, but this may be a cover-up for a serious inferiority complex, or a sign of a mental illness

I am not saying that Rodgers is at fault for having Aspergers at all, or a possible mental illness. But he is absolutely at fault for his ultimate homicide. I don't believe he was clinically insane, it was his choice, there were many factors influencing his behaviours and the Red Pill/PUA Hate community etc. should be watched carefully, but ultimately he developed the misogynistic attitude which allowed him to justify murder. He had a ****ty personality which in no way embodies masculinity, in fact I would say his aggressive display of 'alpha' behaviour causing the murders he perpetrated ultimately make him less of a man than if he'd just been a shy and socially awkward guy never making a move and whining forever alone for the rest of his days.

This has gone off point :tongue:

will come back to original q

Reply 19

Riku

I'd agree that it was him thinking this is how a man should behave by taking concepts of displaying social dominance to the absolute extreme. That doesn't mean that his behaviour was manly, it means his understanding of masculinity was very ****ed up. I reiterate, if anything imo, being an active murderer makes him less of a man than having been a passive 'whiny *****'. At least if he remained passive he could have received some sort of therapy to address his underlying core beliefs and hopefully change him for the better.