It is weird for sure, how they have this reverence for "manly men", but are the farthest thing from it themselves.

Also, WTF is this?

Despite knowing this comment will be a flash point for others to try and assume the worst, instead of engaging what I am trying to get at, I will say it anyway (why stop now?).


I think on this topic of 'Young men' and this issue, we see this blurring of gender roles (more on the left) and this ideal of hyper masculinity (more on the right), being drummed up in culture wars being a part of the challenge for many young men who are more to the middle of these two extremes and not represented.

First off there is nothing wrong with revisiting what were the typical images of gender roles and their historic use as society evolves but what we have seen driven in that area is unfortunately lead by efforts to label what has historically been core to young boy/man behavior as "Toxic" and "no longer desired" in the community.

On the flip side, you have the far right push which, like hypersexualized pictures of women can do for young girls, they create these 'uber male' fantasy images that are largely unobtainable for most men, and quite frankly that few men should want to obtain.

I don't think the left is trying to blur gender roles but rather argue they are social constructs. It's more dissolution than blurring. Maybe this is what you mean but I think it's important to be specific about the left's position here otherwise you undermine it. I also wonder what you see as the extreme elements of this? Cast as the opposite of hyper-masculinity, it sounds like you're painting a picture of men being "feminized" but that's not the intent.

This is a really right-wing take on what is meant by toxic masculinity. What is being popularly labeled on the left as toxic are the extreme elements of masculinity, things like violence, homophobia, and misogyny. These are not core to male behavior.

What if I told you that historical young man behavior is terrible and we should knock it off?

"dissolution", ..."blurring" equals largely the same to me.

i am not referring to men being feminized although there is something happening there in that regard as mens testosterone levels fall precipitously across generations.


A population-level decline in serum testosterone levels in American men


Don't project your take on me. I am talking about the move from those aspects with the push now into areas such as young boys play fighting/rough housing, many of the games young boys tend to like to play (tag, dodge ball, etc), or young men approaching women to hit on them being the types of things you often see now labelled in the 'toxic masculinity' catch all box.

There was an absolutely shameful commercial by Reebok or someone like that a couple years ago, trying to be on the right side of some of this flowing out of #MeToo, that should have never been made as it was making sweeping suggestions that basically so many things typically male were wrong for only that reason.


I would say 'duh'.

I mean what else would you think and say. You would be the architect of the broad brush approach.

not Reebok. I just found the one ad which is Gillette.

I get what the ad wants to do but it so badly misses the point and sends young men the wrong messages in so many areas such as where I have timestamped it at...



For instance young men need to be told it is 'ok to approach young women they are attracted and to try and strike up conversations'. They need that now, in the age of devices, more than ever before prior, as more and more young men seem to increasingly lack these social skills.

Telling them 'it is wrong', or 'not cool' to even try is very dangerous imo.

holy **** Cuepee. That ad is - obviously - completely correct that you shouldn't start leering at and trying to stop a woman just because she walks past you on the street. There are many contexts where approaching someone to try and strike up a conversation is appropriate, but ffs man, the context in the Gillette ad was clearly not that.

He’s going to start wailing about how the left doesn’t want him to talk to women or some ****.

it IS mostly wrong and not cool to approach random women in public and try and hit on them..

and it IS actually dangerous for Women, not the dumbass young men.. lol

Ha, so predictable.

There is absolutely nothing wrong in approaching someone who walks past you in the street, or at a coffee shop, or in the mall.

You have to be a special kind of leftist to think that and to think 'YOU' will define when its appropriate (hello Carlin Meme once again). The approach is and attempted conversation is not a problem, as long as you listen to the person and give them their space after.

I bet you argue for activists on the sidewalks being allowed to try and stop and chat with individuals though right? Me too. As I don't try to control others.

hahaha, wtf?

This place really is infested with leftist toxic ideology.

I've met far more girls that way in my life than any other. I want you to go look up the Carlin Meme again and stop speaking for OTHERS and only speak for yourself.

The idea drilled into your head that a young man, as in that video, just randomly trying to talk to a women in a very public place is the worst of the worst leftist ideology about toxic masculinity.

If I see a gal I find interesting, I have zero apprehension to approach and start small talk.

Women for the cast majority part, still expect men to the approaching and to make the first attempt at contact. They complain about guys they are interested in who won't approach and are waiting for them (the women) to make the first move.

Geez, this forum is predictable.

Cuepee, here is a travel tip for you: don't hit on random women just because they are walking past you on the street.

It really is that simple. Someone should make a commercial about this in case there is anyone still confused.

I'm not and don't gaslight me. You fundamentally mischaracterized what the popular left-wing definition of toxic masculinity is by taking a straight-up right-wing talking point. When you said:

the only distinction you made about what was being called toxic was things at the core of male behavior. This is painting the entirely reasonable goals of reducing the kinds of things I already mentioned as somehow extreme violations of male identity. The leftists are not coming for games or flirtations generally. There is no push. Where children take games to violent or overly competitive ends or flirting turns into harassment or PUA manipulation are areas where discussion of toxic behavioral trends would be appropriate. If you want to say that the left is coming for children's games or flirting broadly, this is sounding like bogeyman stuff again.

I don't take advice from pretentious prick OOBOO's who are speaking for others.

You do not have any right, not even an iota of one, to speak for women on this issue.

Men have every right, as do women to approach any time they want in areas the women have no need to feel their safety is at issue and you have to be the worst type of busy body, "I think I get to dictate to others' type person to think as you do.

How about this as a reply to your demand, 'go **** yourself'.

That is not meant to be any more or less dismissive than it should be. You have zero right or authority (moral or actual) to try and dictate that to anyone who is not you.

uhhh dude, look up thread as uke and Bubbles are already "coming for games of flirtations". They are "pushing".

Cuepee, I'm sorry I have offended you, but please don't try to hit on women who are walking past you on the street. It's just an awkward mix of cringiness and pathetic and disgusting. There are plenty of places you can meet women, you don't need to be harassing them as they walk past you.

Not cool, bro, not cool.

It depends on how you define "hitting on". Not every guy who strikes up a convo with a woman at random is trying to **** her immediately. Socialization with the opposite sex is ok and normal. Women may have reason to suspect your motives but if you're subtle with your flirtation it's no big deal, she'll keep up the convo if you're at least friendworthy and if it leads to continued conversation outside of whatever venue you're at then eventually you just take the plunge and make a move.

Granted some guys are too aggressive, or try to corner women in areas they cant escape (like at work) but that doesnt mean the only acceptable place to hit on a woman is when she has very obviously and deliberately put herself on display for being hit on.

If you are above average in looks, charm, wit and confidence then a cold approach can work.

If you are below average in looks. charm wit and confidence then a cold approach will most likely end badly with the women feeling like she has been harassed.

It not fair or right but there it is.

Even if you are below average and approach 10 women and 9 of them feel harassed, if you score with 1 of them it was worth it.

certified pick up artists itt.. make sure to remember to have a funky accessory to start a convo, and always remember to neg...

like campfire says harass 9 girls get 1 free.

Haha Sklansky nailed it w the Asperger's diagnosis

but for the women ~all of it is unwelcome and they are harassed as a commonplace daily event.

I think most expectations of how we should act tend to be very, very silly.

I read a manual on social etiquette from the late 1800s. I recall it saying that you should never offer a lady a cigar, but you should always offer her snuff (a tobacco product meant to be snorted, I don't know how common it is in other countries). These things do not make a lot of sense.

I think people should be decent towards each other and put value on mutual respect. Other than that than most takes on what and how we should be strike me as narrow-minded and lacking in nuance. When we make these incredibly complex social "rules", we create loophole ethics. If the norms don't tell you not to do it, it's somehow okay.

There is also this wonderful story about the construction of a jet-fighter pilot's seat not long after the 2nd world war. By carefully measuring thousands of pilots and basing the design on averages, they spent a lot of years and a lot of money on building a pilot's seat that fit no-one. Of course, physical body characteristics aren't mental or social characteristics, but I still think it illustrates well that you can't and shouldn't iron out individuality.

Thank God for Gillette!

You met "far more girls that way in my life than any other." by randomly approaching them on the street and hitting on them? You don't find that just ever so slightly creepy? When you say you "met" them does this mean you wooed them with your silver tongue and had a marathon multi positional sex session with them, or you met them for like 30 seconds before they either called a cop or maced you, for randomly approaching them on the street and hitting on them?