Vulnerability

[SubtleStuff]

Hi y'all,

I came across a song that kind of resonated with the inhuman demands I put on myself to cope with a world that seems to have little or no sensitivity to the kind of stressors I deal with all the time. Not surprisingly it was written by a woman, but I found a few covers by men. I find it inspiring that male singers are expressing their vulnerable side for a change. Here's the links from my most to least favorite:

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_jEKKUTEDM
2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlwZrfpnzMQ
3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f98kIowZAUw

I hope you feel inspired by this development.

Cheers,

S

 

[Celtaf]

I'm not sure that I do. I haven't seen much in the way of responses to that sort of thing. I'm glad you find this inspiring for yourself, but does anyone recall how Michael Jackson sang a similar theme "Will You Be There". Then he came under heavy public attack for the effects of his plastic surgery and allegations of abuse. Basically modern society seems to welcome women showing vulnerability, and while I see all these exhortations for males to show vulnerability, I don't see it being rewarded.

I'm glad that some guys have the artistic ability and willingness to show such vulnerability, but I've never felt particularly welcome to present it myself.

 

[Chris4TheMill]

I also took a look at some of the links, but just really can't relate to what was portrayed (basically, the male as a very androgynous figure).
I totally relate to the issue of showing vulnerability, but would like to see that portrayed with a cross-section of male types, not just androgynous ones. But that's just me....

 

[Ceremony]

I follow two of those artists on YouTube and have seen their music for quite a while. I like them. I have had a bit of trouble with that song, UNTIL I've heard these covers. Thanks.

 

[Celtaf]

I also took a look at some of the links, but just really can't relate to what was portrayed (basically, the male as a very androgynous figure).
I totally relate to the issue of showing vulnerability, but would like to see that portrayed with a cross-section of male types, not just androgynous ones. But that's just me....

I think that puts the finger on it precisely.

 

[Chris4TheMill]

I think that puts the finger on it precisely.

I hate when certain traits get stereotyped. As in, if you are male and you show vulnerability, you must be effeminate. I once met this gal at a support group and we seemed to hit it off, started talking on the phone, and one day she blurts out, "Oh, you're gay, right? You seem sensitive so I figure you must be gay."

Well, I gave her a speech in response as to why sensitive men are not always gay. But after that the friendship died.

This type of stereotyping can make many men afraid of showing their sensitive or vulnerable side, for fear of being labelled as such and such, thought of as unmanly, etc. That shouldn't be, we are all different and there is nothing wrong with being sensitive as a male.

 

[Celtaf]

I think that puts the finger on it precisely.

I hate when certain traits get stereotyped. As in, if you are male and you show vulnerability, you must be effeminate. I once met this gal at a support group and we seemed to hit it off, started talking on the phone, and one day she blurts out, "Oh, you're gay, right? You seem sensitive so I figure you must be gay."

Well, I gave her a speech in response as to why sensitive men are not always gay. But after that the friendship died.

This type of stereotyping can make many men afraid of showing their sensitive or vulnerable side, for fear of being labelled as such and such, thought of as unmanly, etc. That shouldn't be, we are all different and there is nothing wrong with being sensitive as a male.

Sensitivity doesn't have to look a particular way, is what I mean. I think being aware of how emotions affect me and others has been beneficial, but I've rarely found it profitable to express this much to others. I find that women in particular don't seem to want to see sensitivity from men except in a few narrow categories.

 

[SubtleStuff]

Hi Celtaf,

I find that women in particular don't seem to want to see sensitivity from men except in a few narrow categories.

Here's a quote you might find interesting:

"Most women pledge allegiance to this idea that women can explore their emotions, break down, fall apart—and it's healthy," Brown said. "But guys are not allowed to fall apart." Ironically, she explained, men are often pressured to open up and talk about their feelings, and they are criticized for being emotionally walled-off; but if they get too real, they are met with revulsion. She recalled the first time she realized that she had been complicit in the shaming: "Holy Shit!" she said. "I am the patriarchy!"

Brene Brown from https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/04/messages-of-shame-are-organized-around-gender/275322/

Cheers,

S

 

[Chris4TheMill]

Brene Brown has been doing some great work on issues of shame and vulnerability. I think everyone in America should listen to at least one of her Ted Talks (you can find them on You Tube).

I find that older women (like over 65+) are worse when it comes to being revolted by men openly displaying feelings, especially vulnerable feelings. When these women were growing up, the so-called "strong, silent type" was the most desirable male archetype in cinema. They will swoon over guys from John Wayne and Robert Mitchem to James Bond or any character played by Clint Eastwood. This archetype embodies being in charge, acting decisively, containing emotion, and easily bedding - and just as quickly leaving - women. This stereotype holds that talking about one’s feelings is a sign of weakness. And if you are not like the strong silent type, these women tend to think you are either gay or just not very masculine.

It's like an embedded cultural trap that is hard to shake loose from. It's like impossible to convince women who think this way that men who are not the S.S.T. are o.k. too, that we come in different shapes, sizes, and flavors.

 

[Celtaf]

Hi Celtaf,

I find that women in particular don't seem to want to see sensitivity from men except in a few narrow categories.

Here's a quote you might find interesting:

"Most women pledge allegiance to this idea that women can explore their emotions, break down, fall apart—and it's healthy," Brown said. "But guys are not allowed to fall apart." Ironically, she explained, men are often pressured to open up and talk about their feelings, and they are criticized for being emotionally walled-off; but if they get too real, they are met with revulsion. She recalled the first time she realized that she had been complicit in the shaming: "Holy Shit!" she said. "I am the patriarchy!"

Brene Brown from https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/04/messages-of-shame-are-organized-around-gender/275322/

Cheers,

S

Thanks very much for the reminder. I've read that before, but I have noticed as well that popular ideas prevail in the face of it. A good example of this is the hue and cry against "Nice Guys" who admitted that they are confused by the romantic choices women make. Celebrities, psychologists, feminist activists and others shamed those guys for admitting their awkwardness in dating and their confusion and frustration with women's behaviour. A tiny few offered good advice for better social confidence, but mostly the the Nice Guys were shamed and told that they were wrongly feeling entitled to women's time and sexuality.

The same has happened, then, from the majority of commentators about men being involved with #MeToo. What I believe most women mean by vulnerability is that they want men to help women feel it's okay to be vulnerable by showing the occasional example that has nothing to do with women--like saying shedding a few tears over a dog dying or something.

Perhaps Brene Brown is, herself, wrestling with this but I'm skeptical.

 

[Celtaf]

Brene Brown has been doing some great work on issues of shame and vulnerability. I think everyone in America should listen to at least one of her Ted Talks (you can find them on You Tube).

I find that older women (like over 65+) are worse when it comes to being revolted by men openly displaying feelings, especially vulnerable feelings. When these women were growing up, the so-called "strong, silent type" was the most desirable male archetype in cinema. They will swoon over guys from John Wayne and Robert Mitchem to James Bond or any character played by Clint Eastwood. This archetype embodies being in charge, acting decisively, containing emotion, and easily bedding - and just as quickly leaving - women. This stereotype holds that talking about one’s feelings is a sign of weakness. And if you are not like the strong silent type, these women tend to think you are either gay or just not very masculine.

It's like an embedded cultural trap that is hard to shake loose from. It's like impossible to convince women who think this way that men who are not the S.S.T. are o.k. too, that we come in different shapes, sizes, and flavors.

I think that the modern women's movement and its allies want only encouragement for women, and they don't accept that this also includes taking responsibility for your choices and plans and how they affect others. There's a belief within this movement that taking responsibility is just a way for people to take advantage of your time. I'm sure you've seen this, the stereotype of the overworked housewife or working mom, everyone demands her time, no one gives her anything, etc. So her focusing on herself and her me time is much deserved and long overdue. I believe that such people think that men wanting equal emotional vulnerability time is just another demand. This is selfish, stupid and immature but since most media people and academics want to appear pro-feminist, this is what we have.

I think that for some men that this is not an issue. For my own part, I find that it is important to be wary of women until I have built up a stronger ability to judge their behavior and have reasonable boundaries with them. I personally believe this is something that modern men need to relearn. I placce emphasis on 'fair'--that it has to be fair to others as well as to oneself.

 

[chairdesklamp]

Celtaf--That's pretty astute an observation and pretty believable.

The thing is, other recognised movements are doing the same thing. I think this is a trend.

There's minority racial movements that have turned into the same thing, deciding their liberation is not in equality, but in treating other racial minorities like the people at the top treat them. Not dismantling priveledge, but becoming the priveledged. Same with biphobia/transphobia, etc, among cisgender homosexuals.

And, much like male SA survivours, this is really bad for eraced demographs (e.g., bisexuals, Asians, of which I'm both. Oh joy)

The loudest faction in the women's movement right now are the ones who simply seek to replace white cisgender men with white cisgender women, changing absolutely nothing in the forest, just switching positions of a tree or two.

There's also a recent belief that RECOGNISED oppressed people are all 100% saints and can do no wrong. (Meanwhile, they're free to join in on villifying less recognised oppressed castes' oppression, and you can neither call them out or even say you're a person without punishment, which punishing you for trying to be a person is generally approved of). This can be seen in full force online, and frequently is. Simplified example I get, and got in real life screamed at me on Christmas, "It's sexist to call me racist, ching-chong!" (Okay, well, she actually stood over me and screamed three minutes worth of stuff to that effect while LGBT centre staff and all other attendees watched and did nothing because I'm an eraced caste, and women can do no wrong, so it's good when a recognised caste is racist to an eraced one, but you get the idea. There are other words you can replace sexist with and get things I've still had screamed at me)

Obviously, that's bunk, and equal capacity means equal capacity to do harm as well as good, but I'm pretty sure the world is going completely insane right now.

With racial minorities, this all started in the 80s as we took a turn and the first steps in the direction we are in now. Before, minority races were all in solidarity. Look up Steven Kiyosi Kuromiya or Yuri Kochiyama for evidence. MLK jr and Malcolm X welcomed them.

With Gay Liberation, it was there at the beginning and got much, much worse.

With women's lib, I can tell you that early movements were strictly for white women only. That's about it.

But I think when we compare it to the past and present-day shape of other movements, there's a trend that this movement is one of.

As for what to do about it, well, I'm pretty pessemistic about being accepted by larger society as a real person in my lifetime.

I really also have never understood how someone can be bigoted while being oppressed themselves and furthermore, speaking out about it when it's against them (i.e., they are fully aware of what it looks like and that it's wrong, but do it to others anyway)

While I wouldn't call it a caste, I'd argue that male SA survivours are a oppressed class. We're ridiculed, shamed, ercaced, have special needs related to it, including needs for a community, and our grooming generally means mistreatment by society, underperforming, underemployed, underpaid. Often times, we end up disabled (a class unto its own). We were exploited and end up further exploited by people who want to take advantage of the scars.

I majored in Behavioural Science, so this isn't your average janitor getting sociopolitical.

I want to tie this up, but I forgot everything else I was going to say. However, I've offered a lot of parallels and offered similar insights to what you have, so I think I made some good evidence for you being on the nose.

In this climate, it's probably safer to be wary of groups that come with an "I'm oppresed so I'm incapable of being wrong" when you are not only also vulnerable but invisible and okay-to-hate. If nothing else, society will try to pull a mass-gaslighting on you should you ever have problems with that person.

I feel like I may be repeating some stuff here. If I am, forgive me. My last abuser left me with some head trauma, and PTSD can also do a number on memory retention.

 

[Celtaf]

Celtaf--That's pretty astute an observation and pretty believable.

The thing is, other recognised movements are doing the same thing. I think this is a trend.

There's minority racial movements that have turned into the same thing, deciding their liberation is not in equality, but in treating other racial minorities like the people at the top treat them. Not dismantling priveledge, but becoming the priveledged. Same with biphobia/transphobia, etc, among cisgender homosexuals.

And, much like male SA survivours, this is really bad for eraced demographs (e.g., bisexuals, Asians, of which I'm both. Oh joy)

The loudest faction in the women's movement right now are the ones who simply seek to replace white cisgender men with white cisgender women, changing absolutely nothing in the forest, just switching positions of a tree or two.

There's also a recent belief that RECOGNISED oppressed people are all 100% saints and can do no wrong. (Meanwhile, they're free to join in on villifying less recognised oppressed castes' oppression, and you can neither call them out or even say you're a person without punishment, which punishing you for trying to be a person is generally approved of). This can be seen in full force online, and frequently is. Simplified example I get, and got in real life screamed at me on Christmas, "It's sexist to call me racist, ching-chong!" (Okay, well, she actually stood over me and screamed three minutes worth of stuff to that effect while LGBT centre staff and all other attendees watched and did nothing because I'm an eraced caste, and women can do no wrong, so it's good when a recognised caste is racist to an eraced one, but you get the idea. There are other words you can replace sexist with and get things I've still had screamed at me)

Obviously, that's bunk, and equal capacity means equal capacity to do harm as well as good, but I'm pretty sure the world is going completely insane right now.

With racial minorities, this all started in the 80s as we took a turn and the first steps in the direction we are in now. Before, minority races were all in solidarity. Look up Steven Kiyosi Kuromiya or Yuri Kochiyama for evidence. MLK jr and Malcolm X welcomed them.

With Gay Liberation, it was there at the beginning and got much, much worse.

With women's lib, I can tell you that early movements were strictly for white women only. That's about it.

But I think when we compare it to the past and present-day shape of other movements, there's a trend that this movement is one of.

As for what to do about it, well, I'm pretty pessemistic about being accepted by larger society as a real person in my lifetime.

I really also have never understood how someone can be bigoted while being oppressed themselves and furthermore, speaking out about it when it's against them (i.e., they are fully aware of what it looks like and that it's wrong, but do it to others anyway)

While I wouldn't call it a caste, I'd argue that male SA survivours are a oppressed class. We're ridiculed, shamed, ercaced, have special needs related to it, including needs for a community, and our grooming generally means mistreatment by society, underperforming, underemployed, underpaid. Often times, we end up disabled (a class unto its own). We were exploited and end up further exploited by people who want to take advantage of the scars.

I majored in Behavioural Science, so this isn't your average janitor getting sociopolitical.

I want to tie this up, but I forgot everything else I was going to say. However, I've offered a lot of parallels and offered similar insights to what you have, so I think I made some good evidence for you being on the nose.

In this climate, it's probably safer to be wary of groups that come with an "I'm oppresed so I'm incapable of being wrong" when you are not only also vulnerable but invisible and okay-to-hate. If nothing else, society will try to pull a mass-gaslighting on you should you ever have problems with that person.

I feel like I may be repeating some stuff here. If I am, forgive me. My last abuser left me with some head trauma, and PTSD can also do a number on memory retention.

I think that as you say that there are qualifications for being right and for not being wrong. I believe most people when they think they might be wrong feel ashamed and try to prevent that shame so they cover it by self righteousness. Ideologies like identity politics help them do that.

But I've noticed that generally the guys around here care less about accusing others and more about trying to just live a life with some sense of hope, seek some healing, find some peace. There's no ideology backing this, there's no huge social force saying "good for you". There's just the personal struggle and occasional comradeship. So yeah, as you say, there's a caste issue going on. It's fashionable right now to blame everything on men.

As Chris said earlier, it may be that some of the instigation for this comes from older people who still have this notion that men need a slap upside the head. I have little patience left for this anymore.

 

[chairdesklamp]

Oh, I figured that what was discussed previously comes from outside. Yeah, here is pretty safe and refreshingly free of identity politics. I feel it's the only place on line in English that is right now. I actually wonder if it's because we're so under-the-radar.

Yeah, I'm pretty done with that, too.

So, I end up a temporary substitute parent to young people a lot, and I've seen some really dark stuff on-line in their circles. White women claiming it would be feminist to rape 'helpless, weak' Asian men to hundreds of "like"s.
A general rising notion that it's empowering to beat the stuffing out of your boyfriend for, say, bringing home wings and not burgers.

The older people are probably thinking of a wife socking a husband on a sitcom to a laugh track. Which is a forerunner to the new idea. Its parent ideology, if you will.

It is with the older set "men are uncivilised brutes and the harmless slap of women will bring them to their senses harmlessly, because women aren't strong enough to abuse, so female-on-male abuse is hilarious and justified."

Now it's "women are oppressed, so they should oust men and become the oppressor and even killing men (yes, there are some who endorse male genocide like it's the Yugoslavian war) is liberating and perfect because (identity politics)."

 

[SubtleStuff]

Hi Chris,

I totally relate to the issue of showing vulnerability, but would like to see that portrayed with a cross-section of male types, not just androgynous ones.

I've been pondering this, because it's true that often the typically strong men don't portray vulnerability very well. Here's something that approaches it. The energy of the music is angry but the words include "just makes me want to cry". It's a start. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTDWHaPnTY4

I've also been thinking that many of the most spiritually evolved men embrace vulnerability very well. Jesus' statement on the cross "Thy will be done" is about as vulnerable as you can get. Surrender to the will of God/Existence/Life is a key aspect of every spiritual path I've come across. Jesus rarely comes across as a tough guy, but the story of him in the temple chasing out money changers with a whip certainly isn't particularly effeminate nor weak. There are others that have a strong male energy: Gurdjieff, all the Zen masters, and Bodhidharma come to mind. None of them sang to my knowledge... so no YouTube videos to show . The singers and poets of this calibre of man (Rumi, Kabir, Hafiz) are long dead. I don't know of any current ones.

Cheers,

S

 

[Chris4TheMill]

SubtleStuff,

I didn't get much from his version of the song (it's originally an Elvis Costello song). But I think we're on the same basic page. It's just that, when people see more effeminate men making a plea for certain emotions or vulnerability, it is just easier for people to dismiss that as "Oh well he's just sensitive," or "well he's almost like a girl anyway, do what do you expect." (Not trying to offend anyone here, I'm just sayin' this is how people are....!)

So like it or not, instead of the cast of "Glee," we need to see a Clint Eastwood type. Brene Brown is good for the female side because she's not some air-headed young actress type whom people won't take seriously (I can name a few but you can get the idea). She is a middle-aged researcher with great credentials and a very solid sense of self. So, some of it comes down to P.R. and marketing - look for a credible spokesperson that people at large will listen to.

 

[Celtaf]

SubtleStuff,

I didn't get much from his version of the song (it's originally an Elvis Costello song). But I think we're on the same basic page. It's just that, when people see more effeminate men making a plea for certain emotions or vulnerability, it is just easier for people to dismiss that as "Oh well he's just sensitive," or "well he's almost like a girl anyway, do what do you expect." (Not trying to offend anyone here, I'm just sayin' this is how people are....!)

So like it or not, instead of the cast of "Glee," we need to see a Clint Eastwood type. Brene Brown is good for the female side because she's not some air-headed young actress type, she's a middle-aged researcher with a very solid sense of self. So, some of it comes down to P.R. and marketing - look for a credible spokesperson that people at large will listen to.

Yeah this was what I was trying to say before. I think as well that sometimes people dismiss more traditional masculinity without recognizing that there are a few problems with that:

1. It has its merits. Stoicism and duty are not bad things, and they are more often associated with men. Not without reason.

2. We do not yet know how much of it is nature or nurture.

3. People decrying it tend to not recognize how profitable.NOT being vulnerable often is, and how risky vulnerability can be.

 

[SubtleStuff]

Hi Chris,

It's just that, when people see more effeminate men making a plea for certain emotions or vulnerability, it is just easier for people to dismiss that as "Oh well he's just sensitive," or "well he's almost like a girl anyway, do what do you expect."

I hear you well! My mother frequently has called me "hypersensitive" and its NOT a good thing. She's in denial over the effects of what she did to me and to some degree I understand it. Gender roles were and remain quite rigid in her generation. I think if we are going to escape this problem, we are going to have to let go of seeking satisfaction in another person and find ways to find it within ourselves. For men, in my understanding, this frequently revolves around needing physical and emotional nurturing from a woman.

I think many women hate being valued mostly for their physical appearance and ability to soothe/placate just as much as we hate being valued primarily for our ability to pursue, provide and protect. Both of these have strong connections to reproductive roles. Love is something else and isn't confined to male-female relations.

Thanks for writing,

S

 

[Tom E.]

really nice & true song... hit's home

 

[Chris4TheMill]

Hi SubtleStuff,

You said some interesting things here.

My mother frequently has called me "hypersensitive" and its NOT a good thing.

Ah...Don't you hate that? I know that one well. That is a default / deflective statement that my aunt makes when any of us tell her that something she said or did was wring and hurtful.

I no longer let her get away with it, though....I can out-debate her now

She's in denial over the effects of what she did to me and to some degree I understand it. Gender roles were and remain quite rigid in her generation.

Again, yep. My aunt's kids and myself have told her repeatedly how thing she did or said growing up were really hurtful, and while she "sort of" acknowledges it these days (which is a big change in itself), she has never apologized for any of it. She holds on to her vision of herself as this "better than others" person.

I think if we are going to escape this problem, we are going to have to let go of seeking satisfaction in another person and find ways to find it within ourselves.

Yes, so true. I have reached that conclusion as well. The way I think about it is, we have to hold people and their place in our lives more loosely than we are used to. It is like an inner attitude that can shift and accept and take delight in one's own self. That way, the people you spend time with are add-ons, and you let them be themselves, the flawed humans they are. It is not always easy but it is good to not emotionally hang onto people too tightly.

I think many women hate being valued mostly for their physical appearance and ability to soothe/placate just as much as we hate being valued primarily for our ability to pursue, provide and protect. Both of these have strong connections to reproductive roles. Love is something else and isn't confined to male-female relations.

Interesting observation, and I bet that is true in many cases. I for one would like to be valued for all of my complexities, rather than be graded for how many aspects of a rigid gender role I possess. I hate when people pigeon-hole me or run me through a checklist.


Sincerely,

Chris