• OneMeaningManyNamesOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    It is pretty unclear what you are trying to say. If you are suggesting that this regulation (good or bad in itself) bears a relation to the mental turmoil suffered by young men, you should back it up with some evidence. This is some remote innuendo.

    In reality, mental health organizations like APA recognize that young men are under lot of pressure, which leads to addiction, violence, self-harm, steroid abuse, depression, and even suicide. There are special guidelines for counseling young men, and there is active research about the root cause.

    A rigid traditional understanding of masculinity is shown to be the main culprit.

    Do you have anything to back up your claim that regulating misogyny somehow has an effect on young men’s and boys mental well being? So far it is shown that the likes of Andrew Tate and Jordan Peterson cause greater harm than this ill-conceived law.

    • drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      But you are just replacing it with a new standard instead of worrying about being viewed as being unmanly it’s now fear of being seen as misogynistic and now there are legal reasons to worry.

      • OneMeaningManyNamesOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Right enough, the old standard is toxic and must go. You can wear a dress, cry in public, take it up yours. You still will be a manly man.

        there are legal reasons to worry

        "You could go to jail for saying the wrong thing! And how you are supposed to know what is considered offensive this month? Who knew you will have to subscribe to a feminist newsletter to be a man? " Did someone get addicted to old privileged sex roles, and now they feel they will be persecuted for hating women’s bodily autonomy?