Random Politics Thread

This forum is the place to have more serious discussions about politics and religion, and your opinions thereof. Be courteous!

Moderator: Forum Administrators

Forum rules
When a registered user insults another person (user or not), nation, political group or religious group, s/he will be deprived of her/his permission to post in the forum. That user has the right to re-register one week after s/he has lost the permission. Further violations will result in longer prohibitions.

By default, you are automatically registered to post in this forum. However, users cannot post in the politics forum during the first week after registration. Users can also not make their very first post in the politics forum.
User avatar
mōdgethanc
Posts: 10620
Joined: 2010-03-20, 5:27
Gender: male
Location: Toronto
Country: CA Canada (Canada)

Re: Random Politics Thread

Postby mōdgethanc » 2019-01-11, 0:17

I had a similar experience today on another forum where there was a thread about the APA's new guidelines on clinical practice with men and boys. Because the paper contained some language that is commonly perceived as "SJW" and because it pointed out problems with traditional masculinity, the right is currently losing their shit over it and framing it as misandrist radfem propaganda. I realized there was nothing I could say that would change the minds of these poor triggered snowflakes, so I decided to say fuck it and stopped trying.

User avatar
Yasna
Posts: 2047
Joined: 2011-09-12, 1:17
Gender: male
Location: Boston
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Random Politics Thread

Postby Yasna » 2019-01-11, 0:49

mōdgethanc wrote:I had a similar experience today on another forum where there was a thread about the APA's new guidelines on clinical practice with men and boys. Because the paper contained some language that is commonly perceived as "SJW" and because it pointed out problems with traditional masculinity, the right is currently losing their shit over it and framing it as misandrist radfem propaganda. I realized there was nothing I could say that would change the minds of these poor triggered snowflakes, so I decided to say fuck it and stopped trying.

You don't think the APA deserves any of the flack they're getting? I don't follow these issues closely, but this seems like a fair criticism:

The APA Can’t Spin Its Way Out of Its Attack on ‘Traditional Masculinity’
Ein Buch muß die Axt sein für das gefrorene Meer in uns. - Kafka

User avatar
mōdgethanc
Posts: 10620
Joined: 2010-03-20, 5:27
Gender: male
Location: Toronto
Country: CA Canada (Canada)

Re: Random Politics Thread

Postby mōdgethanc » 2019-01-11, 3:24

Yasna wrote:You don't think the APA deserves any of the flack they're getting? I don't follow these issues closely, but this seems like a fair criticism:

The APA Can’t Spin Its Way Out of Its Attack on ‘Traditional Masculinity’
I think the APA set themselves up for the right to use them as a punching bag by using "woke" rhetoric about privilege, intersectionality, and microaggressions. However it was all cited with copious amounts of research and their conclusions weren't that radical. The backlash is from men who mistakenly believe their whole identity is being threatened. Of course a conservative publication is going to get worked up about an alleged attack on gender roles. But the problem is with the way the APA framed it more than the content.

David French then redefines traditional masculinity to mean good things and ignores the bad things about it in his piece, which is just the opposite of what the APA did.

I have seen some legitimate criticisms of the paper, such as that it approaches gender from a social point of view and doesn't discuss biology. It's also possible that the research they based on it was low quality or ideologically driven. But for the most part, it just looks like more outrage culture to me.


Return to “Politics and Religion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest