Politicspolitics

Tue Jan 8, 2019, 08:22 PM

APA wants masculinity treated as a behavioral disorder.

e American Psychological Association (APA) Effectively Declares Traditional Masculinity to be Toxic Masculinity; Urges Men to Purge Themselves of Manliness
—Ace of Spades

We need to have our droopy bits snipped off and tidied up into a lady-like #FakeNews snizz.

The new eunuch imperative was announced by a woman.

The American Psychological Association (APA) effectively declared war on "traditional masculinity" in its newly released rules on how psychologists should deal with men...

In announcing the new guidelines on the APA website, Stephanie Pappas noted that most of the top CEOs, business leaders, and politicians are men, but that men also commit most homicides, are most likely to be victims of violent crime, have a shorter life expectancy than women, and face harsher punishments in school.

On the other hand, we also Make All The Stuff, including the new stuff, and including the intangible stuff like the math. Well, not all of it. But a lot of it.

Could it be possible that the drive to compete and dominate might be an irreplaceable part of the creative process and general industriousness? Robots make things because they're following mathematical programming, but men make things because they're following biological programming, and the biological fact that women are more attracted to doers and makers (and warriors) than to couch-potatoes.

Do women want men just to be robots, making things for society for no particular reason without any toxic notion that being productive and innovative will raise our status, win us respect from men and desire from women, and redound to our own benefit by showing we competed and won?

Or are we supposed to keep doing these things without any expectation of personal gain?

Do women do a lot of things without any expectation of personal advancement or gain in one area or another? Is it just men who are supposed to give up social competition?

"APA's new Guidelines for Psychological Practice With Boys and Men strive to recognize and address these problems in boys and men while remaining sensitive to the field's androcentric past," Pappas wrote. "Thirteen years in the making, they draw on more than 40 years of research showing that traditional masculinity is psychologically harmful and that socializing boys to suppress their emotions causes damage that echoes both inwardly and outwardly."

By "androcentric past," they are referencing the idea that men were once taken as the default exemplar of humanity and women were taken to be deviations from the model. If women were more emotional than men, that was a problem with women, and not humanity generally. If women were more neurotic than men, that was a problem with women, and not humanity generally.

Obviously, the NPCs do not seek to recognize women as equals to men; they simply seek to replace the androcentric model, in which any deviation from the male norm was considered somewhat pathological, with the gynocentric one, in which any deviation from the female norm is pathological and should be treated with therapy, drugs, and hormonal treatments.

If men are more competitive than women (and I'm not sure they even are -- women are ruthlessly and unceasingly competitive in the social pecking order games), then that's a pathology of men which must be treated, with an eye towards making them more like the default, normal, paragon model of humanity -- women.

If men are more (overtly) aggressive than women, that's a pathology, and men must be taught to express their aggressions through seeding rumors and trying to turn a social rival's friends against her and ultimately drive her from the group.

Men must be made into women. Women are the perfect working model; men are the defective deviation from the proper functioning of the model.

The guidelines themselves warn against "masculinity ideology," which refers to a "particular constellation of standards" such as "anti-feminity, achievement, eschewal of the appearance of weakness, and adventure, risk, and violence."

Any guidelines about a much more rapid "femininity ideology," aka feminism?

The guidelines mention gender role conflict, defining masculinity as separate from femininity and focusing on "four domains:" success, power, and competition; fear of experiencing vulnerable emotions; discomfort with expressing affection among men; and conflict between work and family relations.

Men show affection among other men by 1, busting their chops in a manner that has certain rules to it to avoid getting too vicious and thus sparking violence and 2, actually complimenting each other, which admittedly is sort of rare, but it is generally meant earnestly when it does happen (unless you're a feminized type who is forever praising your fellow NeverTrumpers' latest mouthfart online articles while not so secretly despising each other -- you know, like chicks), and 3, otherwise generally getting along with them and not getting into Queen Bee pecking order fights with them every single day alternating with (disingenuously) praising each other. You know, like women do. But I guess that's the "right way" to show affection. Because women are the Perfect Norm men must aspire to.

For 40 years, women were relentlessly propagandized that everything they do is perfect and "empowering" and men were at the same time endlessly propagandized that everything they do is wrong, cruel, improper and "threatening." Maybe psychologists should apply the same You Go Girl methods they used to pump up women's egos for men?

Or should they just continue degrading them forever?

The degrading doesn't really mean all that much to us as we just kind of ignore this feminized, maniacally-angry-at-straight-men thing that unmarried women and gay guys have turned into a near religion, but it does have some effect, especially on boys and young men who haven't learned to ignore this bullshit as sexual supremacism of lunatics.

It has bad effects, and the lunatics should stop trying to pathologize and "problematize" standard and unobjectionable male behaviors and inclinations.

There are pathological extremes of male behavior, of course -- but those have long been recognized as mental defects. But now psychology is coming for standard, unobjectionable, useful and productive inborn male traits.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/379068.php

I would add:

* We've been told for decades that all gays are born that way (despite clear examples of things like cultural and situational homosexuality) and because they are born that way that makes it natural and if it's natural it's acceptable (yay sickle cell!)

But all of the behaviors the APA is describing are natural to men and - as Ace points out - are net positives.

* if masculinity is bad and has endured for so long why has it been allowed to do so? Saying it is the responsibility of non masculine types to change it now implies that they have the power to do so. What have they been waiting for?

Most likely they know they will get their asses kicked and their women taken away.

That means their only hope is to try and convince the alphas to assume beta subservience.

Punch 'em. For the sake of civilization - punch' em and send them running away crying.

16 replies, 389 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to Charlie Mike (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2019, 08:25 PM

1. What do they say about women who choose to become men?

That's "normal" but men aren't?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to foia (Reply #1)

Tue Jan 8, 2019, 08:27 PM

2. Yes. Also assertive, independent, strong and competitive women are cool too.

It's only bad for men.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #2)

Tue Jan 8, 2019, 08:44 PM

5. Especially white men. (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2019, 08:36 PM

3. What absolute garbage.

Sounds like a bunch of man-hating lesbians wrote it.

Probably did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Grumpy Pickle (Reply #3)

Tue Jan 8, 2019, 08:40 PM

4. I'll wager some of those man hating lesbians have penises.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #4)

Tue Jan 8, 2019, 08:45 PM

6. Plus many of those who don't would love to have one. (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2019, 08:59 PM

7. Apparently there's no lower bound on stupidity.*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to docgeezer (Reply #7)

Tue Jan 8, 2019, 09:05 PM

8. The refrain I often see when debating transgender issues is, "Well, the experts agree..."

(except for the experts who do not)

After this I don't think those "experts" have any credibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2019, 10:06 PM

9. Just the first step to criminalizing masculinity. Mark my words. All crime is behavioral by nature

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2019, 11:29 PM

10. This is why I have finally left the field.

The gays, feminists, and white knights have taken over the field. This is political agenda, not clinical or experimental reality.

In essence, if you are a woman or LGBT, everything you are by nature is good. You were born this way and should be lauded and applauded. But if you are a man, then everything you are by nature is bad. You were born that way and should be derided and changed.

This is really no different than what happened to psychology in the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc. It was a function of the political state and not the actual pursuit of clinical excellence and rational research.

When my membership lapses this year, I will not re-up. I have been a member since grad school, served on multiple committees, and been involved with several clinical studies.

Perhaps it is time to create alternatives against this instead of trying to fight from within which is just not possible any longer with the number of fuck-heads put into place over the last 50 years. So once again, another once venerable organization has fallen by infiltration by the neo-Marxist left.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TM999 (Reply #10)


Response to Charlie Mike (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2019, 03:04 PM

11. I've always said that I really don't have a problem with gay marraige.

Lesbians and homos have just as much right to be miserable as the rest of us.

The only problem that I have with gay marriage
would be if they try to make it mandatory!

Sounds like these "researchers" are working on the first step.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Original post)


Response to Charlie Mike (Original post)


Response to Charlie Mike (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2019, 03:48 PM

15. You....

...can read the actual "guidelines" here.....

https://www.apa.org/about/policy/boys-men-practice-guidelines.pdf

All you need to know is laid out in the Definitions at the beginning:

Gender
Cisgender
Gender Role Strain
Masculinity Ideology
Gender Role Conflict
Oppression
Privilege
and
Gender Sensitive

Just reading that list of psycho-social drivel lets you know the rest of it is going to be a real treat.

The only positive is that regular, normal folks are unlikely to ever come into contact with this nonsense and thus will remain blissfully unaware.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Steelydamned (Reply #15)

Thu Jan 10, 2019, 03:02 AM

16. The only redeeming grace in this situation

is that the APA guidelines are not 'rules'. There is no way to track whether a psychologist is or is not following them. The only situation where it will become applicable will be in the in-patient treatment centers when some SJW idiot makes it a 'rule' for the facility. I predict a record number of therapists are going to leave the field and/or leave the larger facilities for private practice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Politicspolitics