TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • A Voice for Men
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Rational Male
    • The Spearhead
    • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Justice for Men and Boys
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • Mensactivism
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Rian Stone
      • RooshV
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

Psychology Today: Masculinity is not the problem.

smeltaway

October 25, 2020
83 upvotes
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-minds-boys-and-girls/201901/masculinity-is-not-our-enemy
Archived from /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates is a place for the discussion of men's issues from a left wing perspective.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Psychology Today: Masculinity is not the problem.
Author

smeltaway

Upvotes 83
Comments 37
Date October 25, 2020 7:08 PM UTC
(5 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/jhz1rq/psychology_today_masculinity_is_not_the_problem/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/psychology-today-masculinity-is-not-the-problem.1062616
https://theredarchive.com/post/1062616
Top posts by smeltaway

At 22 Alexander Johnson was suspended from the Tenn football team after being falsely accused of rape. He was a 1st round talent but was never drafted. At 26, he was acquitted and joined the Denver Broncos. He played his way into the starting lineup, proved his worth and now is a starting MLB/ILB.

2867 upvotes
October 18, 2020
/r/MensRights

Shaming and condemning men who are strong and powerful as representations of "toxic masculinity" while promoting the exact same traits for women is not equality.

2232 upvotes
September 26, 2020
/r/MensRights

In the UK, the rate of women identifying as feminist fell from 46% in 2017 to 27% in 2020

699 upvotes
March 26, 2021
/r/MensRights

The World Economic Forum's Gender Gap Index is specifically constructed so that it can never show a female advantage

568 upvotes
December 1, 2020
/r/MensRights

The idea that we can simply be "free from gender norms" is probably not accurate. Science shows humans develop and enforce norms naturally, subconsciously and illogically from an an early age.

256 upvotes
October 23, 2020
/r/MensRights

If the Johnny Depp case has shown us anything, its that men need to stick together and support each other...we're certainly not going to get it from anywhere else.

226 upvotes
November 14, 2020
/r/MensRights

Feminism Magazine's Feminism 101 defines toxic masculinity as: "physically strong, unsentimental, and assertive". Here's the science to prove all of those are good for you. (Seriously, even unsentimental is a net positive).

225 upvotes
October 27, 2020
/r/MensRights

Im sick of men's defense being "not all men". It should be "almost no men". The vast majority of men are not rapists and its about time we acknowledged this.

206 upvotes
August 20, 2020
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]LJ-90 39 points40 points41 points 5 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

As a therapist, it can be...complicated, when a man enters the office. I mostly work in a non profit, and we see a range of issues, but something I find is that when a lot of men come to the first interview, they are quick to point out that they are only there because mom, wife, daughter or someone else, wants them there. They do not need it, they are good on their own, but they are doing it as a sign that they care about this other person in their life. Framing it as a sacrifice they are making to the betterment of their house life.

After that, usually is a "oh okay, what you say makes sense, so I'm open to keep coming here, as long as I feel is useful for making me a better husband/partner/father/Etc". While I'm not saying that being a good father or husband isn't important, men that want treatment with the idea of "I need help" are rare, like, their own mental health is not that important, it's more important that they are fulfilling certain roles sucessfully. The idea that men should be able to deal with everything on their own is very deep inside us, I feel.

[+]Aaod5 points 5 years ago* [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

Part of this is due to how men with issues are treated by society and those around them and part of this is a lot of therapists are outright awful for men. A man that shows signs of faltering/being unable to do his duty as a man is usually tossed aside because for most people all men are good for is a beast of burden or wallet. Being able to excuse why they are seeking treatment lets them pretend it isn't on them or that they are not actually less capable. As a personal example of how awful therapists can be for men I had one bitch feminist shrink on I think it was the first or second session tell me to man up... when I was seeking help for among other reasons suicidal depression. Imagine getting up the nerve to ask for help as a man and getting that kind of response from someone you are paying money to help you or at the very least listen to you.

[–]LJ-90 19 points20 points21 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I hear you and I'm sorry you had to go through that. Where I work there was a woman that once told a patient "you have to be a better husband and a better father, think about your children!". And when I asked her what was that about she said "he needs to man up!".

Sadly, lots of therapists (men and women) are like that. They usually complain about male patients, saying that they are rude, in denial, or cry babies. I always tell them:

Clients are supposed to be difficult, that's why they are clients.

But honestly, the way mental health professionals treat men can be awful. I once had a patient that had depression, one of the reasons was that his ex-gf had an abortion. He felt awful about it and he kept having thoughts about the child, and he felt guilty about the abortion, and kept saying that he could have been a single father if given the chance, but he never said anything other than "I could keep the baby" but her mind was set. He also felt guilty about his feelings, because he knew "her body her choice".

I remember talking with a friend (female, also a psychologist) about this type of problem, and telling her that abortion has a side effect that people don't talk about, like this person, men that have to deal with the pressure without being able to have a space to talk about it. And she just kept saying "her body her choice", until I said "but he's suffering, he didn't try to stop her, but he feels bad" and she just kept saying her body, her choice. By the end, the most she did was say, "well, good thing he has you then, help him".

The APA needs a reform and honestly, a better handle in who they let be a mental health professional. If you are able, you should file a complaint against that therapist. To be honest, more people should do that, if you feel your therapist did something wrong, talk to them about it and if you feel it's needed file a complaint.

[–]Aaod 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

My personal experience with shrinks is 1 in 6 is good and helpful to the patients, but 1 in 6 is actively detrimental to them. I personally suspect a lot of this has to do with caregiver burnout where those with empathy rapidly burn out and leave the profession but those who are basically monsters don't have to deal with the issue thus stay in the profession. This happens with a lot of caring oriented jobs unfortunately.

Sadly, lots of therapists (men and women) are like that. They usually complain about male patients, saying that they are rude, in denial, or cry babies. I always tell them:

I can understand that their are scenarios where statements trying to push or encourage a patient are good... but on a second session when they are seeing you for depression? It was like someone reaching out for help that is on fire and the response was hmm lets pour more gasoline on that will help.

That sort of thing is just one example of my interactions with feminists being so incredibly negative that my no censorship opinion of them would get me banned from reddit.

[–]dontpet 9 points10 points11 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I run a community counseling service that is overtly a men's support service. I'd guess less than 10% of our clients are there because they were pressured by family.

We have 220 men per week coming for counseling, with that making us the largest counseling service in our city. I'm surprised by the significant engagement by men given we've only been around for 6 years. I suspect we activated an existing market.

Not in America but very much in a classical western country.

[–]LJ-90 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Wow, sounds really interesting, could I DM you to get more information of the service you provide? I would honestly like to learn more about this so I could get some ideas for the future, I find myself thinking about how to help more men and engage with them, so this sounds really interesting.

[–]dontpet 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Of course! Dm away.

I'm not very shy about sharing my info. We call it a men's centre. It has done things like set up men's shed, distributed a booklet about men's well being, run men's health conferences, some men's health research, and some advocacy.

Lot of fun!

[–]smeltaway[S] 9 points10 points11 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't think that's what the article is about. The focus is more on men being strong, capable, etc. and how that is beneficial for men--not something we should take away.

But yeah I think there is something in us that pushes for self-reliance

[–]AskingToFeminists 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Have you given a look at posts like this on r/askmen ? The answers are enlightening.

The second top, and most of its answers are "I've learned that either I can do it by myself or just I may as well die.", explaining how most people seem to actively reject shows of male weakness.

The top fourth is "I was going through severe depression and suicidal ideation, I went to see therapists that were either detrimental or dismissive".

I'm friend with quite a few therapists, all women, like the majority of the field. And while they aren't actively anti-male or in any way dismissive, they are still very oriented towards more female typical ways of dealing with things. In the video "it's not about the nail", they very much agree that it's not about the nail.

The few people/initiatives I've heard about that are more male friendly are books like Tom Golden's "the way men heal", and initiatives like the Australian men's sheds and Deborah Powney 's project "walking to recovery". Those are rather few and far between.

Many men dislike just talking about a problem, and are more action oriented. CBT still is good, but just going to someone about your issue is not that natural for many men, and things like groups where a trained professional trains men to be there to provide advice for their peers to initiate the realization that they might need more could be an idea, like Deborah Powney mentioned getting inspired by with regards to firefighters, who view psychologists as "he doesn't know what it's like, what can he understand?".

There's more to be investigated on in how to get men a help that is appropriate to them.

One of the least thing, as some have mentioned, would be to advertise being actually male friendly, when you actually are. Just that could go a long way for these men who have had a string of bad experiences with hostile therapists.

[–]smeltaway[S] 33 points34 points35 points 5 years ago* (16 children) | Copy Link

Quick summary. I've changed verbiage from the article to make it more succinct but I believe this accurately reflects the content:

Traits that are typically thought of as masculine--strength, personal power (not domination), ambition, grit and fortitude are positive for men and necessary if we are going to thrive in the world. (As I've some months ago, numerous studies show they are extremely good for you).

The men who cause damage are usually the ones who feel powerless (and, IMO, feel they have no outlet for this or hope of changing).

The solution is not to damn and condemn men for these traits. Masculinity can be "strength, purpose, honor, power, and compassion that culminates in the art of building a strong enough male self to be able to give [of] that self to others in love and marriage, in parenting and mentoring, in work and life." 

[–]dontpet 19 points20 points21 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nice to have a positive framing of masculinity.

It would be nice as well if they focused on the reasons men aren't thriving and the lack of supports both formal and informal to improve our outcomes.

Not acknowledging that current systems do not serve men well is harmful. It buys into the the old hyperagency approach to men that anyone with insight should acknowledge prior to focusing on something internal to men.

[–]romulusnr -4 points-3 points-2 points 5 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Some would say that the first ones are the positive masculinity, and the latter ones are the toxic ones. But everytime I talk about the qualifying aspect of adjectives like "toxic" (a la "toxic waste" versus, say, waste that is not toxic) I get brigaded to hell.

[–]Nath43673 7 points8 points9 points 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

But everytime I talk about the qualifying aspect of adjectives like "toxic"

I think the issue for many of us is the pairing of "toxic" with "masculinity" and the adverse effects of that, not an inability to understand general grammar rules and conventions.

So it probably depends on what/who you're calling toxic. The example of waste is a non-issue.

[–]romulusnr 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I hear a lot of sentiment that "toxic masculinity" is interpreted as "masculinity is toxic" when the term was defined to mean specific aspects of masculinity that are or can be toxic, thus the "toxic waste" analogy... though maybe not an apt one

[–]Nath43673 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Again, many like myself who oppose the use of the term are aware of what it was defined to mean (though that seems to vary even among those who claim to have the real definition, or who claim to be using it for "good").

In another thread of this post, you rightly critique the implicit traditionalism of the OP article because it lionises masculinity instead of connecting it with any negative aspects of gender roles for men.

I believe the impact of the use of the term TM is the inverse of this. In spite of what it technically means, it effectively demonises masculinity in popular discourse.

[–]romulusnr -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

In spite of what it technically means, it effectively demonises masculinity in popular discourse.

That's because the word is being misused. If you made a different word, they would just start using the new word the same way. The only alternative is to reclaim the word.

[–]Nath43673 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Or you could just use an expression that doesn't have the associative problem. eg. toxic gender roles for men

[–]smeltaway[S] 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Umm I don't think the second set is toxic. Is there any actual evidence of that?

[–]romulusnr -3 points-2 points-1 points 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

The men who cause damage

[–]smeltaway[S] 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Seriously? You didn't even read it did you. The article specifically says the traits DO NOT cause the damage.

[–]romulusnr -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

What it says is that those traits are good but they are powers that can also be used for evil. However, it also does not serve as a comprehensive list of traits that are considered masculine; it selectively picks the better ones of the lot in order to defend the whole as not necessarily bad. Which is valid and important, but also not the full picture.

The article paints a really rosy picture of men that harkens back to traditionalist imagery and it's awfully Promise Keepery to a leftist palate.

masculinity is, at its heart, a “husbanding” vision of strength, purpose, honor, power, and compassion

Masculinity is a protective force against violence, not an invitation to commit violence.

That may as well have been cropped out of a traditionalist evangelical sermon. And what isn't mentioned is that the technique by which masculinity prevents violence is to use the threat of violence to prevent violence which is a self-contradiction -- and frankly, putting the onus on men to shield others from violence ain't exactly great for men in the end -- see also the draft.

So while laudably defending male traits and pointing out the issues face by men, it also doubles down on traditionalism, and frankly, no thanks

[–]smeltaway[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Uhhh science. Look for some of the posts on here and other subs about how these and similar traits are protective against depression, anxiety and other things.

If you'd rather ignore science, thats your problem.

[–]romulusnr 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

So, a trait is positive as long as it benefits the holder of the trait, regardless of the impact of that trait on others?

Kind of like how a strong and powerful military and hegemony of the planet are protective against invasion and internal strife.

Solipsism isn't a left wing virtue.

[–]smeltaway[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Do you have any actual evidence the specific traits mention are harmful beyond feminist opinion pieces and your emotions?

Dominance, emotional rigidity and a playboy attitude were found to be harmful in a meta analysis which did not control for levels of socialization. That is the primary basis for the "toxic" masculinity push.

These aren't the traits discussed in the article, and they don't make up the majority of what it means to be a man.

Edit: I think solipsism just means you don't think other people really exist. Narcissism is what you're going for I believe.

[–]romulusnr -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm not really limiting the term to what's discussed in the article as it's not really relevant to the immediate point of what the term TM means (or, moreover, what it should mean or was supposed to mean)

There is masculinity that is not toxic, and there is masculinity that is toxic; the latter is TM, the former is just ... M. Maybe PM? That's my point. In my experience, even male advocates would acknowledge that there are masculine traits that ain't great. Literal self-sacrifice being one of them (tends to shorten our lives). Violent aggression being another (ditto).

By solipsism I mean "acting so selfishly as if other people don't exist". That might not be the textbook definition... in which case, touché there. But I don't know a better word for that other than "being a prick"

[–]buddhone 9 points10 points11 points 5 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

Strange to see Psychology Today adressing male problems like this. I have seen many articles from them pushing the classic feminist narratives, is this an editorial change?

We are probably heading towards a deep economic crisis in the west and I suspect this might be the end of these misandrist narratives, so I take articles like these as the first signs of it.

[–]smeltaway[S] 8 points9 points10 points 5 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Nah I think they still have a lot of feminist crap, but they allow some dissenting opinions.

As someone with an economics degree, I don't think that's very likely, although I kind of wish you were right. More likely we just grow more slowly than other powers like China and India. Economic Decline of Empires is a great book you might like on this (its very dry though. Its a historical economists collection of academic writing).

[+]buddhone1 points 5 years ago [recovered] (12 children) | Copy Link

Thank you for the recommendation!

I also wish I was right, this article here has been king of illuminating from a ecnomic perspective.

https://www.singularity2050.com/gems.html

10 years prior prequel here https://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html

Maybe you know them already as they are well known writings.

[–]smeltaway[S] 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

They seem extremely arrogant for not actually knowing anything about economics. If they're right its dumb luck, not skill

[+]buddhone1 points 5 years ago [recovered] (10 children) | Copy Link

Well, his first article, written 10 years ago, was quite spot on. Not sure why you assume they don't anything about economics?

[–]smeltaway[S] 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Yeah that one was extremely accurate. Im actually really impressed by that. They predicted something I don't think I've ever seen from anyone else. I may be too overconfident in my assumption given he was right when I almost certainly would have been wrong had I been looking at the world more then (I was in HS).

For the econ one, I don't think he knows much because he basically assumes the fed has no idea how to recognize any trends, doesn't understand how the fed uses messaging (its a policy tool) and doesn't look at savings rate or asset bubbles as mediators of inflation. He also doesn't discuss any measures of unemployment and time spent searching for jobs.

I do agree on his theory that a free market with corrections for externalities (thats basically what he's saying in j) is optimal though.

[–]Chemical_Release8671 -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

He does discuss those. Actually, I think his writings are brilliant in pointing out how ignorant people with Economics degrees are.

The Fed has admitted to not knowing why money-printing has not caused inflation.

[–]smeltaway[S] 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

He strikes me as one of those people who shouts a lot from the sidelines and predicts enough that eventually they're right. Just about anyone can do that, it isn't hard. And the reason the fed was confused is they expected the phillips curve to hold, which it did not and they didn't know why it didn't. A valid question that was miscontstrued.

[+]Chemical_Release86710 points 5 years ago [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link

That is false. His analysis of the Federal Reserve is spot on. Many people have figured out that Economists with PhDs are totally clueless. He accounts for the effect of technology on the economics of inflation/deflation, which seems to be above your pay grade.

Plus, he has a strong record of predictions. You haven't bothered to look at his site, but have no trouble bashing him. Are you someone with an Economics degree (i.e. someone who is not qualified to speak about Economics)?

[+]smeltaway1 points 5 years ago [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link

I am not interested in arguing with an idiot about a subject he fails to understand. Models have incorporated technology growth for a long time. I hope you put your money where your mouth is and put your net worth in place where it directly varies with the accuracy of these predictions.

[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I have seen several good men-friendly articles in Psychology Today. Maybe they're just pluriform, as every good medium should be.

Part of the crisis is the superfluousness of traditionally male work that much depended on physical strength but is automatized now, so I don't see how that will end misandry.

[–]buddhone6 points 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Men tend to be the innovator and net contributor in society. If you lack that push in a time of crisis, you are set for failure.

So unless the trend changes we risk more men will not engage in the most proficient jobs.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter