We Don’t Need Less Traditional Masculinity, We Need More

[corbe]

We Don’t Need Less Traditional Masculinity, We Need More
 
This effort to eradicate masculinity is dangerous because it disrupts the relationships that depend on the complementary nature of the sexes.

By D.C. McAllister   
January 15, 2019
 
It was a typical college night for the party crowd—drinking, flirting, and drinking more. Michael, a former football player from a small southern town, went out with friends from high school and found himself with one of the most beautiful girls he had ever seen. After several shots and pitchers of beer, they headed back to campus with his friend and her roommate.

Stumbling to the front door, the girl leaning in Michael’s arms looked up at him, her brown eyes glazed and inviting. She smiled and kissed him. Her lips tasted of tequila. She fumbled for her key and staggered into the room. Michael’s friend and the other girl were already kissing, not caring that they weren’t alone. They fell into bed, tossing clothes to the floor.

The girl with Michael giggled as she pulled him to her side of the room. Lights from streetlamps slipped between the shades and onto a pile of pink pillows, posters of bands on the wall, and a string of pearls hanging from a prom picture beside the bed.

She fumbled with the buttons on her shirt and leaned back on the bed. She reached for Michael, but he pulled back. “I think it’s best if you just go to sleep,” he said softly. “We can talk tomorrow.”

The girl glared at him, feeling rejected. She turned her head away in a pout, but as he pulled the blanket over her, she looked up at him. Her eyes softened and she whispered, “Thank you.” Michael kissed her forehead and left, returning to his dorm alone.

This is a true story, one that many men might identify with either as Michael or his friend who took advantage of an easy situation. It’s also a story of masculinity—the “traditional” type we hear so much about today—or, rather, the kind we don’t hear about.

Pathologizing What Makes Men Themselves

<..snip..>

http://thefederalist.com/2019/01/15/dont-need-less-traditional-masculinity-need/

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

Psychiatry's Current Greatest Controversy, Fraud, Bullsh*t, or What?

http://psychroaches.blogspot.com/2016/09/psychiatrys-current-greatest.html

 In the current issue of the journal Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry, Australian dissident psychiatrist Niall McLaren titles his article, “Psychiatry as Bullshit” and makes a case for just that.

The great controversies in psychiatry are no longer about its chemical-imbalance theory of mental illness or its DSMdiagnostic system, both of which have now been declared invalid even by the pillars of the psychiatry establishment.

In 2011, Ronald Pies, editor-in-chief emeritus of the Psychiatric Times, stated, “In truth, the ‘chemical imbalance’ notion was always a kind of urban legend—never a theory seriously propounded by well-informed psychiatrists.” And in 2013, Thomas Insel, then director of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), offered a harsh rebuke of the DSM, announcing that because the DSM diagnostic system lacks validity, the “NIMH will be re-orienting its research away from DSM categories.”

So, the great controversy today has now become just how psychiatry can be most fairly characterized given its record of being proven wrong about virtually all of its assertions, most notably about its classifications of behaviors, theories of “mental illness,” and treatment effectiveness/adverse effects.

[roamer_1]

Sorry...