Anonym (Libbsticka) skrev 2021-04-03 22:54:27 följande:
#84 KlantSmurfen skrev 2021-04-02 23:58:17 följande:
CMNI bygger på genusforskning (hegemonisk maskulinitet) och är ideologisk.
Det är extremt dåligt av Läkartidningen att ha genusforskning istället för riktig forskning som källa.
I självmord + självmordsförsök ligger män och kvinnor ganska lika men män lyckas oftare, ideologer utgår ifrån att mellanskillnaden beror på 'den maskulina normen'
Den här artikeln är mer seriös
Därför tar fler män än kvinnor livet av sig - SVT Nyheter
www.svt.se/nyheter/vetenskap/darfor-tar-fler-man-an-kvinnor-livet-av-sig
En artikel med kritik mot CMNI
Division 51 - Male Psychology Network
malepsychology.org.uk/tag/division-51/ Din första länk säger bokstavligen samma saker som artikeln i Läkartidningen: Män har sämre nätverk, tar inte stöd av andra, skäms över psykisk sjukldom och söker därför inte hjälp.
Och detta beror väl rimligen på hur de har fått lära sig att män ska vara? Inte att de faktiskt har mindre behov av stöd eller är dummare i huvet än kvinnor och därför inte fattar att något är fel när de får panikångest eller inte orkar resa sig från soffan på en vecka.
Könsprofilerna är intressanta men jag tycker den kvinnliga är jättemärklig också.
Artikeln tycker jag är lite för svepande formulerad.
Det är verkligen väldigt många olika former av fördelar/nackdelar med att tillhöra ettdera könet i alla världens länder och det är därför omöjligt att adressera allt i samma text. Man kan liksom inte börja diskutera 10% extra lön vid mammaledighet i ett land där kvinnor får syra slängt i ansiktet om de går ut utan slöja.
"
Din första länk säger bokstavligen samma saker som artikeln i Läkartidningen: Män har sämre nätverk, tar inte stöd av andra, skäms över psykisk sjukldom och söker därför inte hjälp. "
Du får gärna citera den del som bokstavligen säger att det beror på hur konformistiska män är till mansnormen och
Ett aktivt undvikande av vården med förklaringen att "det inte var manligt att söka hjälp", och dessutom fanns risken att den emotionella krisen felaktigt skulle bedömas som psykisk sjukdom.
"
Och detta beror väl rimligen på hur de har fått lära sig att män ska vara? "
Vem har lärt dem att män ska vara så? Föräldrar, lärare, media, politiker?
Vänsterfeminister har lärt sig om "mansnormen" när de läst något genus"vetenskapligt" om hur man skapar genus och strukturer, ofta med en bok som källa typ Raewyn Connell?, Yvonne Hirdman, som har andra böcker som källa.
Nästan alla män bör ju känna till vad som är en norm för dem och bör ju vara ganska insatta i "mansnormen" men verkar ha svårt att känna igen sig och har ofta svårt att förstå när vänsterfeminister förklarar för män vad som är en norm för män, att män inte håller med struntar vänsterfeministerna i, de är ju expert på män och behöver inte lyssna.
Det kanske finns en naturlig orsak till att män har svårt för feminism och feminister men skulle de läsa något av andra feminister som t.e.x Daphne Patai skulle de nog lätt förstå vad feministen skriver och håller säkert med
"WOMEN'S STUDIES CAN BE HARMFUL"
The excesses of Women's Studies affected not just faculty, but, even more so, students. And the deepest outrage of our three informants was directed at the miseducation suffered by the students they had left behind
[...]
The students, poor things.I feel really bad for them, because they're not being given an education.
And, you know, once they're in Women's Studies, it's like the Stepford Wives! Women's Studies turns them into ideologically inflamed Stepford Wives!
I was always able to recognize them, these kids who come in, kind of zombified, who start uttering stock phrases. And you say, "Well, so-and-so certainly put her bootprint on these kids." Because it's obvious they' re terrified of a thought, because if they ever had a serious thought, they might start reflecting on this stuff they're taught to repeat. I don't want to make it that clear-cut, but the ones who identified themselves as Women's Studies students were the worst. It was just a relentless dogmatism: "We will not talk about this!" Any criticism is because you're homophobic, or you're a patriarchalist in disguise, or you're this or you're that!- whether the criticism came from me or from other students. Politics is driving out their ability to think!
You see, what "feminist process" in the classroom winds up being is a push toward conformism and toward silencing dissent. It's all done under the rubric of being nice and open, and not being an authoritarian, old-fashioned type of teacher. But this winds up being tremendously more coercive. Because with authoritarian teachers you know they're being authoritarian, and you can resist. You know who's doing what to you. But this other way is manipulation, which is far worse than straight coercion, because students are being led someplace without any clarity as to who's accountable for what and who's leading them there. And since it's all supposed to be for your own good, you see, there's this terrible paternalism, or should we call it maternalism? "It's all for your own good." And I think that's far inore dangerous than a more old-fashioned, straight-forward authoritarianism, because it's harder to resist that kind of maternalism than it is the other, and to be clear about what's going on.
Daphne Patai - Professing Feminism
Twelve Scholars Respond to the APA's Guidance for Treating Men and Boys - Quillette
John Paul Wright is a professor of criminal justice at the University of Cincinnati. He has published widely on the causes and correlates of human violence. His current work examines how ideology affects scholarship
Thirteen years in the making, the American Psychological Association (APA) released the newly drafted "Guidelines for Psychological Practice for Boys and Men." Backed by 40 years of science, the APA claims, the guidelines boldly pronounce that "traditional masculinity" is the cause and consequence of men's mental health concerns. Masculine stoicism, the APA tells us, prevents men from seeking treatment when in need, while beliefs rooted in "masculine ideology" perpetuate men's worst behaviors-including sexual harassment and rape. Masculine ideology, itself a byproduct of the "patriarchy," benefits men and simultaneously victimizes them, the guidelines explain. Thus, the APA committee advises therapists that men need to become allies to feminism. "Change men," an author of the report stated, "and we can change the world."
[...]
Criticism was immediate and fierce. Few outside of a handful of departments within the academy had ever heard of ?masculine ideology,?
[...]
Instead of passing quietly into the night, as most academic pronouncements do, the APA?s guidelines did what few such documents have ever done: They engendered a social media maelstrom, and likely not only lost professional credibility, but potentially created new barriers for men who need help.
[...]
In today's hyper-politicized environment, good intentions are often converted into the currency of ill-will. Yet the APA was forewarned by at least one psychologist that the guidelines would not be well received; that the document's overtly partisan language and politically progressive narratives would not encourage men to receive services, but to keep them away.
[...]
Unfortunately, instead of calming the storm by acknowledging the validity of at least some criticism, the APA doubled-down, releasing a public statement asserting that the APA supports men, and the guidelines had been misunderstood and mischaracterized. In the same statement, they explained, "When a man believes that he must be successful no matter who is harmed or his masculinity is expressed by being sexually abusive, disrespectful, and harmful to others, that man is conforming to the negative aspects associated with traditional masculinity." In other words, according to the APA, these selfish, violent, and abusive behaviors are not an issue of a person's character, nor are they related to a person's individual pathology. They are about "masculinity"-especially "traditional masculinity." For added authority, the statement was signed by three presidents of the APA.
quillette.com/2019/02/04/psychologists-respond-to-the-apas-guidance-for-treating-men-and-boys/ Meta-analyses of the relationship between conformity to masculine norms and mental health-related outcomes. - PsycNET
Abstract
Despite theoretical postulations that individuals' conformity to masculine norms is differentially related to mental health-related outcomes depending on a variety of contexts, there has not been any systematic synthesis of the empirical research on this topic. Therefore, the authors of this study conducted meta-analyses of the relationships between conformity to masculine norms (as measured by the Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory-94 and other versions of this scale) and mental health-related outcomes using 78 samples and 19,453 participants. Conformity to masculine norms was modestly and unfavorably associated with mental health as well as moderately and unfavorably related to psychological help seeking. The authors also identified several moderation effects. Conformity to masculine norms was more strongly correlated with negative social functioning than with psychological indicators of negative mental health. Conformity to the specific
masculine norms of self-reliance, power over women, and playboy were unfavorably, robustly, and consistently related to mental health-related outcomes, whereas conformity to the masculine norm of primacy of work was not significantly related to any mental health-related outcome. These findings highlight the need for researchers to disaggregate the generic construct of conformity to masculine norms and to focus instead on specific dimensions of masculine norms and their differential associations with other outcomes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
psycnet.apa.org/record/2016-56584-001
