Definitive list of definitions.

Of course, there is no such thing.
To write a definitive list of words used in philosophy. Funny. But nevertheless a seductive aspiration.

I agree with:

My answer to all: There's a way of understanding each, that is not given by setting out their definitions in words but seen in the way they are used.
But further, any such string of words will be inadequate, failing to account for all uses. — Banno

Nevertheless, I started to answer (with whatever came to mind, as requested) and got as far as this...

Being - existing ( anything that is); living ( rel. to human, animal, spirit, - real or imagined)
Awareness- how we understand ourselves to be, when awake. Different levels of perception, according to our senses.
Consciousness - a/a and being responsive; not unconscious.
Thinking - considering and imagining all kinds of everything.
Time - what we have too little of. Or too much of. To be and do all that we need/want to achieve for wellbeingness.

Off the cuff nonsense. I caught myself and I re-read the OP:

Take the attitude that there’s a fairly perceptive young person asking you. How would you answer? — Mikie

If this life student is asking questions about such things, then they already have a degree of knowledge.

Socrates asked similar questions 2,500 years ago. — Mikie

He asked questions of students. He made them think things through for themselves.
Starting with how much did they know or think they know...

Like you, I am grateful for recommendations made along the way,
I'm inspired to read novels/short stories for an increased understanding. Models for how to write.
I suppose that's 'reading as a writer'. A phrase I never understood until now. — Amity

Following a recommendation, I bought this:

Reading Like a Writer: A Guide for People Who Love Books and for Those Who Want to Write Them
- Francine Prose

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reading_Like_a_Writer

It's so well-structured and a joy to read. Each of the 11 chapters covers a specific element.
Words, sentences, paragraphs, narration, character, dialogue, etc.
What is fantastic is that she includes relevant and loved examples from literature.
Prose talks to you knowledgeably and conversationally.
She carries you along with her enthusiasm and humour. There are no hard-and-fast rules.

I had to laugh at her final inclusion of 'Books to Be Read Immediately'!
Only 5 pages and alphabetically arranged by the surname of the author.

Chapter One - Close Reading.
Starts with the question: Can creative writing be taught?
The way she answers this...is funny and insightful.

Not at all too kind. It needs to be said.
I have an ongoing Love/Hate relationship with TPF.
This kind of thing brings light to the darker moments. It's why I return. Thanks to all!

Thank so much for encouraging me. — 180 Proof

Ditto. :sparkle:

I used to be a fastidious plotter and outliner from first paragraph to the last. I couldn't start without knowing the ending first — 180 Proof

I have had to learn how to find (or receive) images which intrigue and then improvise with or around them, either singly or together, until something like a narrative takes shape. Then I have to follow that 'idea' blindly, ignoring cliches and my expections, groping for discoveries and perplexities, the more amusing the better. I don't know what I'm doing anymore with blank page; even less so when it comes to the real craft of rewriting. — 180 Proof

That is quite the challenge.
To re-learn ways of being or doing following 2 bouts of covid, now long-covid.
The adjustments required. Take time, patience and perseverance.
The passion for writing, though, never seems to diminish, even if not as confident as before.

I wonder just how different your stories are, following your new way.
I wonder how you learn to receive images. Or is it that your mind is more open to them?
Duct Tape was written quickly, under time pressure, and yet it is one of the most thought-provoking and pleasurable stories. You only have to look at the lively discussion it engendered.

You are marvellous. Keep on going on!

Everything you write here and elsewhere on TPF is appreciated more than you will ever know. Your open nature, sharing and patience in persevering with explanations. The way you articulate your thoughts. Your humour. I could go on but I'll spare your blushes and leave you with a simple:
"Thank you!"

I'm curious that you don't use a computer. I would find chaotic writing styles like ours very hard to manage with pen and paper. — hypericin

Oh, but I was using my laptop. Until I couldn't type fast enough to hold the ideas!
I didn't know how to keep track of tumbling thoughts. So, I grabbed whatever I could...

I think it is important that a story is enjoyed AND understood. Otherwise, what's the point?
— Amity
I think this is a mental hurdle you have to get over. It is not actually essential that you be understood.
Your brain made a thing and the reader's brain mingled with it, played with it, that's the sexy part. — hypericin

You are right, it is not essential that a story, or novel, is fully understood. The joy of reading (and discussion) is about how interpretations vary. Even on a re-read years later.

I've also realised that an author's explanation for a story or novel is not always available or necessary.
Why then, do TPF storytellers attempt such?

An author's helter-skelter, labyrinthine sentence can be appreciated aesthetically. In and of itself.
But as a puzzle, or a prompt to deeper thought, the reader's eye can be opened to aspects not previously considered. The shared or different life experiences; their own psychology or philosophy.

Like you, I am grateful for recommendations made along the way,
I'm inspired to read novels/short stories for an increased understanding. Models for how to write.
I suppose that's 'reading as a writer'. A phrase I never understood until now.

Perseverance is not about success for me. It's a life-vest: I have to get something written every day, good, bad or lackluster - and it may well end up deleted on the next good day - simply in order to keep doing it. Just so I won't throw the malformed, stillborn monster against a wall* (You can't do that on a computer. I quite miss the dark satisfaction of a sheaf of despised paper splatting against the wall and flying all over the room.) One novel took over 35 years to write, I gave up on it so many times, for years on end. My SO nagged me into reviving it after retirement, and I think it turned out better than it would have the first time. — Vera Mont

Your sharing - telling it like it is, with humour - means so much to me and others, Vera.
So, perseverance keeps you afloat - to prevent drowning in an ocean of complications and dead bodies.
I understand your dislike of zombies.

From what you say, sometimes it's good to give one particular project a rest. Persevering in that case would not necessarily have produced the best result. So, there's a time and a place for persisting.
The brain can work on it in the background until the moon and stars align.

The other thing is, the last two novels were complicated SF; three very different settings and a huge cast of characters with different time-keeping and seasons; different cultures, funny names, so they absolutely required planning. I'm a plodder - that's what works for me. My SO is a seat-of-the-pantser. He doesn't outline anything: he has an idea, makes up a protagonist to carry it — Vera Mont

I love the fact that you have different ways of creating. I understand the need for the careful planning of a novel. Is your approach to short stories the same? I imagine so. I read that you might 'build a poem' next time around. Structure and rules of engagement necessary for a firm foundation.
Good to know about but I'm not very good at following rules. What needs to come out, comes out.
As in my 3-liner 'Sempre'. A simple, even if ambiguous, expression of thoughts and emotion.
Perhaps not even poetry.
I enjoy the sense and quality of haiku but counting syllables...nah! Then again, the challenge is part of the moment, I suppose. And once you have the knack...

I wouldn't recommend either method to other people, because everyone has to find out what works for them. But I can give one tiny piece of general advice: It you want to improve your description, read Bradbury. — Vera Mont

I agree. Writing is personal. For the experienced and successful, regular habits will no doubt have formed. They know what works to achieve whatever aim or goal. Some might keep the method but change the style. It's fascinating.

Thanks for your advice. How could I resist after this:

When I was 19, my first chief tech gave me an old paperback copy of Dandelion Wine. It was a revelation worthy of a fanfare by the celestial brass. I still consider him the grand master of evocative description. — Vera Mont

I had a look on Amazon. Then purchased from its subsidiary, AbeBooks.

* About volatility. I'm not gonna tell you what I threw against a wall. It was meant for hubby. I was young. We divorced.

I think we agree on the importance of writing, process, technique and perseverance. All good!

Well, I think perseverance is a method. — javi2541997

I persevere with my argument:

There are ways, and then there are ways...

Where there's a will, there's a way. [=if you have the desire and determination to do something, you can find a method for accomplishing it]

Perseverance and Method are different.

Method is a procedure. Steps to follow. Processing the different ways of doing something. This can be taught. Nurture. This is what I want to learn. The How to...

Perseverance is persistence and effort in the process, despite setbacks.
A way of being or attitude. Personal attribute. Nature.
Can be developed by a person with self-knowledge.
Knowing what is stopping the process. The psychological element.
Talking with others can help but can it be 'taught' as a method? Hmm.
Perhaps...this is what or how I need to be.

I think I've changed my mind...again...

Both are important to produce a prize-winning cake. We agree.

@Jack Cummins your thoughts?

Apologies, if this perseverance of mine is a distraction from the main thread topic.
Back to the question of:

How do you write? — hypericin

With little to no perseverance. I'm bad!

It is about of maintaining the pace every day constantly — javi2541997

I understand that daily practice would be helpful, if not essential when writing a novel:

Yes, I think that'svital. Sometimes it doesn't flow - or even trickle; sometimes you have to wring out every word as from a heavy wet towel. — Vera Mont

But that is not everyone's goal and it's not always possible for those would-be writers who have other priorities. Only the most determined and they already have that value or motivation to persevere in them. Success at all costs.

if I say I want to write a 1,000 page novel, I will do it for sure. That's what perseverance is about, the technique comes later on. — javi2541997

Are you sure? Isn't that just as much about confidence?
What is it that you are persevering with? Writing.
And that already includes some degree of skill and capacity...technique if you will. A way of carrying out the task. All part and parcel.

I am not sure that this post will be helpful but sometimes it can be reassuring to hear the voices of those who are struggling rather than simply those of the 'successful'. — Jack Cummins

It is most helpful and indeed reassuring!

I think that outlines and plotting are essential. — Jack Cummins

I think I'm coming to that point of view too!

One of my favourites is Stephen King's 'On Writing' — Jack Cummins

Yes, I have his book. I'll look it out to see what he says about outlines. Thanks for the reminder.

I can remember making clear plans for essays at school and how it helped so much — Jack Cummins

Yes, I struggled with the very idea of making an outline but eventually got there in my OU studies.
It helped enormously!

I have probably gone too far in therapeutic writing, especially based on Julia Cameron's idea of 'morning pages' and realise that the craft of story itself is essential. — Jack Cummins

Well, only you know when enough is enough. I haven't tried that kind of writing. Sounds helpful.

the craft of story itself is essential. For some, it may come easily, just like cooking or sport, but I find it difficult and know that I need to work on it. — Jack Cummins

Ah yes. Cooking is a good example. The ingredients, methods and right tools to make a tasty dish.
Some have an inborn talent, they don't need a recipe or outline. Others like me have to work at it...with or without a recipe. A picture can help. What does a good story look like.

So, yes

Read a lot. — Tom Storm

I did and do. But not always as a potential writer. I've also started to listen to audio books.
The musicality, tone and clarity of a good narrator can bring so much pleasure and inspire.

I suspect the key is to just keep writing and reflect on how it can be improved. — Tom Storm

Yes, I think so. It helps to have friends and critical readers. As in TPF!

Aren't you considering perseverance as a method — javi2541997

Good question. Let me think...

I think of perseverance as a concept like resilience or determination. The ability to overcome obstacles to reach a goal, no matter how many there are.
Perhaps, yes, this involves skill and techniques but overall I think perseverance is more of a positive attitude. Depending on what the goal is. Bank robbers might persevere if first attempts fail!

A method is how you reach that goal. It's a process to be followed to complete any given task.

Your thoughts?

I'm curious what people's writing process is. Mine may be unusual. — hypericin

I've been asking questions about 'The Writing Process' for as long as I can remember.
Until now, not many on TPF have been forthcoming, even in the fiction feedback. So very happy to see the various and open responses.

Interesting to read about the importance of an outline, either in the mind or on paper.
But before that the necessary idea or the questions.
The spark of inspiration, where it comes from and where will it lead...

Then how much of an outline needs to be filled, organised; chronologically or otherwise:
With questions already answered à la Vera .
Or as a very skinny skeleton, the flesh added to head, feet - wherever, whenever:

Since I know the outline, it is easy to know where each new sentence should go. In this way, bit by bit, I fill out the story, until I feel all the gaps are filled. — hypericin

It fascinates me how images and phrases start coming then...fragments at a time.

My writing process is based on perseverance. I am not a professional writer or novelist, but I fully recommend a lecture on "novelist as vocation" by Murakami. — javi2541997

Perseverance is clearly important for a polished end-product.
It's the method, style or techniques that intrigue me.
There are so many books on the subject...I think I have them all!
Now, of course, there is YouTube. My latest find, after buying Updike's 'Problems and Other Stories':

...often there's one (or if I'm lucky several) "perfect"/"ultimate" scene(s), idea(s), or moment(s) I visualize in my head and think "wow that'd be an awesome book/movie/what have you..." and work backwards from there.

You got to "transport" the viewer into an entirely new world... so to speak.Describe things in painfully vivid detail without becoming clumsy or too cumbersome in your wordage. — Outlander

That makes sense to me. Sometimes a story can take place in one space. Like a bar!
The characters, appearance and their interactions can be visualised. The dialogue, their shared concerns, especially if it's a local. As in so many English soap operas.
It's the description part that's difficult, see underlined, how to finesse?

Just write the little bits and pieces, from wherever in the story, onto the page, as they come.
Even though it is by necessity, I do think there are advantages to this process. You are always writing the parts you are actually into, at any given point. Less time on the difficult parts, more enjoyment — hypericin

I had fun with my first TPF story 'Red, White and Blue'. I had an 'interesting' time filling blank A4 sheets with pencil scribbles, hard to decipher once the word vomit was over. The ideas that burst from my brain were circled, underlined, numbered, asterisked and arrowed. There has to be a better way.
I had no plan and no great intentions before I started - things just came to me.
Difficult to pin down.

My story was difficult to follow, for some. For others, they enjoyed the ride even if they didn't understand.
I think it is important that a story is enjoyed AND understood. Otherwise, what's the point?

Truly, they are co-creators, not passive recipients. You are not painting a picture for them, rather you are more a conductor for the symphony of their imagination. — hypericin

I agree that gaps don't always need to be filled. But I've tried to answer your concerns:

So, a sort of ying/yang of bad/good that left me a bit flabbergasted and confused. I want to say other things...Good job here, but, dear author, I'm still left a bit confused.

Not sure if my responses have helped or hindered!?
After my feedback, I struggled to explain my 'process'.
I have asked for help, here:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/832938

Any advice gratefully received...

(yeah, I was a fairly poor bass player in a faux-punk funk/reggae band that played fraternity parties for beer and drugs :yum:) and our girlfriends. — 180 Proof

'Faux-punk funk' - What is that? What did you play?
Not 'Ole Blue Eyes', anyway :wink:

Frank Sinatra Live at the Sands. Where or When

Phil Collins - That's Just The Way It Is (Official Music Video)

"That's Just the Way It Is" is a song (anti-war ballad) by English drummer Phil Collins, released as a single in July 1990 from his fourth solo studio album, ...But Seriously (1989).

Excerpt:
All day long he was fighting for you
And he didn't even know your name
Young men come and young men go
But life goes on just the same

And I don't know why
Why do we keep holding on?
I don't know why
Pretending to be, oh, so strong
Oh, why?
Is there something I don't know?
Or something very wrong with you and me?
Or maybe

That's the way it is
That's just the way it is...

***

The Way It Is - Bruce Hornsby
Bruce Hornsby and the Range from their 1986 album The Way It Is

Standing in line marking time, waiting for the welfare dime
'Cause they can't buy a job
The man in the silk suit hurries by
As he catches the poor old ladies' eyes just for fun he says, "Get a job"

That's just the way it is
Some things will never change
That's just the way it is
But don't you believe them

They say hey little boy you can't go where the others go
'Cause you don't look like they do
Said hey old man how can you stand to think that way
Did you really think about it before you made the rules, he said, son

That's just the way it is... [repeat chorus]

Well they passed a law in '64
To give those who ain't got a little more
But it only goes so far because the law don't change another's mind
When all it sees at the hiring time is the line on the color bar

That's just the way it is.
Some things will never change
That's just the way it is
That's just the way it is, it is, it is, it is

Thanks for reply. It's early morning here, so I'll be brief.

I don't struggle with what it means to be a woman.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woman

It's one thing to share my own private life, but it's uncool to share someone else's. Pretty simple. — Srap Tasmaner

Understood.

Which was kind of you. — Srap Tasmaner

Not really meant to be kind but informative at a practical level.

you don't have to have a philosophically or scientifically rigorous understanding of someone to treat them decently, so the analytical challenge I've been dealing with here is a whole separate thing from just being as good a dad as I can. — Srap Tasmaner

I don't see the two things as being all that separate.
The challenge is to understand a particular problem issue, gender identity.
Both involve reflecting, analysis and dialogue but at different levels.
For an improvement in wellbeing.

The one can inform the other. The personal is a motivating factor in the deeper challenge. How does reducing subjective behavioural aspects to an objective mental, gendered brain module help, even if such existed. You think it would predict behaviour? With a view to what?

[ Feel now I shouldn't have posted this at all, so if you missed it, it's too late. ] — Srap Tasmaner

Why do you feel you shouldn't have posted it? Too open and personal?
I responded to what I felt was a real struggle in understanding and coping.
It wasn't only for your benefit but for others reading. For me, that's important.

I like the analogy. — Ciceronianus

Yes, it made sense to me. However, I would like to see an example of it in use. I can't imagine how it would help with the issues raised in this thread, for example. Grateful for any references.

In fact we're part of the world and our lives made up of our experience interrelating with the rest of it, and others — Ciceronianus

Indeed. I think that is part of my frustration and why I tend to want practical examples.
As I scroll down walls of text, I often think: "So what? What difference does your theory make?".
How does it help? Does it clarify or confuse?

This strikes a chord, except I'm none too sure of the final sentence:

Pragmatism takes the meaning of a concept to depend upon its practical bearings. The upshot of this maxim is that a concept is meaningless if it has no practical or experiential effect on the way we conduct our lives or inquiries. Similarly, within Peirce’s theory of inquiry, the scientific method is the only means through which to fix belief, eradicate doubt and progress towards a final steady state of knowledge. — Peirce, Charles Sanders - IEP

I appreciate this response. I should probably have done more in the way of dotting the i's and crossing the t's. Clarifying connections. Never mind. Now moving on... :sparkle:

I'dd say the malformation is at least related to the definition of toxic masculinity offered, the way toxic masculinity presents is violently, and we are the ones who get to diagnose it. — Moliere

I think perhaps the problem with the term 'toxic masculinity' is that it is not clear-cut. From previous posts, we can see how meanings vary with more or less violence attached. It can suffer from vagueness and being overgeneralised.

That is why I try to supply real examples. I read current news. What's going on? To bring it back to your question of 'Ethics'. However, the post re Iranian women and the 'morality police' was ignored. Why? Other posts more attractive. Ears might have pricked up if I'd chosen another news item:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/24/vladimir-putin-signs-law-banning-gender-changes-in-russia

***

What's up with the continued violence women are subjected to in our society? One possible explanation is that we have unhealthy identities which makes it feel right (enough, at least) to use violence. — Moliere

I feel I have to say that it's not only women who are subjected to violence, and violence itself can take many forms. All genders, ages, and cultures are affected. Seen and unseen.

However, here is one article which describes problems and offers solutions, related to women and patriarchy. With some new terms to consider:
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/jun/01/disaster-patriarchy-how-the-pandemic-has-unleashed-a-war-on-women

***

Though I don't think we'll be able to encompass all concerns with a single antidote, right? This answer more in the spirit of answering the original question, or riffing on the notion of real man which I reject at the outset.

What would you propose as antidote? — Moliere

Of course, there is no single solution to global concerns.

What is the antidote to systemic 'toxic masculinity'?
Could it be philosophy? As in this kind of thread? Education. Listening and learning. A way of looking at problem-solving as in Pragmatism?
There are so many levels and approaches to be considered.
I think back to previous responses from those participants I recently tried to recall. But I think we are going over old ground; like them perhaps it would be wise to move on.

If it is agreed that there is a systematic problem, then any antidote would require action to change or dismantle the system. Different directions might be taken according to a philosopher or activist's analysis.
Of course, this might include a denial of the claim that there is such a thing as systemic toxic masculinity.
Is 'toxic masculinity' simply a useful slogan or is it deeper and ingrained so much that it is not even recognised? Should we concentrate more on particular beliefs and practices, starting with ourselves?

In this thread, I was introduced to Susan Haack. Thanks @Ciceronianus. Then using the TPF Search facility, I noted others who acknowledge her impact on their thinking. I'm wondering why I failed to notice all the mentions. So, paying attention and knowing how others have tracked and dealt with similar problems before - that's a start.

Regarding the complexity of interrelated problems, I seem to remember Haack's analogy of the crossword puzzle. Looking it up, I see it is related to foundherentism:

Haack introduces the analogy of the crossword puzzle to serve as a way of understanding how there can be mutual support among beliefs (as there is mutual support among crossword entries) without vicious circularity. The analogy between the structure of evidence and the crossword puzzle helps with another problem too. The clues to a crossword are the analogue of a person's experiential evidence, and the already-completed intersecting entries are the analogue of their reasons for a belief. She claims that her metaphor has proven particularly fruitful in her own work, and has been found useful by many readers, not only philosophers but also scientists, economists, legal scholars, etc. — Foundherentism - Wiki

Honestly there aren't a lot of those and this is probably the only example you're going to get. (Wouldn't have posted what I did except the language is so interesting.) As a dad, I don't even need to understand my kids to support them and love them, so it's a whole different thing. And I don't ask my teenager for explanations, because he's not a research subject. — Srap Tasmaner

Sorry to jump in here (uninvited) but you are not alone. There are increasing numbers of parents who are having to come to terms with this issue. There is more information and support available than ever before. I linked earlier to the NHS site on gender dysphoria.
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/

But perhaps these are more relevant:

https://www.nspcc.org.uk/keeping-children-safe/sex-relationships/gender-identity/

https://gids.nhs.uk/parents-and-carers/

Hope you find the information useful, even if you can't access UK services.
Best wishes.

One man's meat is another's poison. — unenlightened

:smile:
Yes indeed. I was going to add: ''Choose your poison!"

In this context one human identity is poisonous to another human identity, so one needs to identify self and poisonous other simultaneously. — unenlightened

Exactly.
Edit: Individuals with a multitude of 'selves' can have many poisons and antidotes.

I read about Margaret Mead in another lifetime. I might just have to refresh my memory.
Thanks for the links.

Clearly Freeman and Mead were mutual poisons to each other, and so I arrive again back at the conservative liberal divide, that overlays the nature nurture, that overlays the masculine feminine divide... — unenlightened

I don't think it's that simple, is it?
Some divisions might be black and white, some like it like that.
However, I think we're more often left with a sludgy grey. Not as sexy.
Perhaps lilac, lavender or royal purple...?

my earlier post (you either missed or ignored) re ethics and 'morality police' was in response to this stand-alone post:
— Amity

Heh, sorry. The moth is drawn to the light, and the man playing at philosopher is drawn to disagreement. — Moliere

Yes. You are drawn to whatever play delights you.
Of course, not all moths are drawn to the dangerous light.
There are even theories as to the reasons.

Of them all, I think this one: 'artificial lights resemble the frequencies of light emitted by the sex pheromones of female moths' is quite apt with regard to 'the man playing at philosopher'.

My thought is that a toxic masculinity is a malformed identity. — Moliere

What do you mean by 'identity'? In this thread, the discussion has mainly concerned gender identity.
What is the malformation, how does this present and who gets to diagnose it?

So, the characteristic of being 'masculine' in mind, body or spirit can be 'malformed'.
If it means not fitting what is usual, the correct shape or way of being, this could be applied to any person without it necessarily being toxic, ugly or frightening. It depends on perspective and context. A group identity related to ethnicity, culture or country.

An attempted antidote: a real man feels and acts on love before the pursuit of power, or at least on virtue before the pursuit of power, and does not deny himself his feelings or attack himself for the feelings that he has. A real man is content with his discontentment, and learns to live with himself as he is. — Moliere

The undesirability of systemic 'toxic masculinity' concerns more than what a 'real man' is, or is not.

First, identify the poison.
Isn't that what a Pragmatist or pragmatist would do? Ciceronianus @t clark @universeness @unenlightened...? — Amity

this thread should belong in the philosophy of religion section, except that no one here is questioning the foundations of practice and belief. — unenlightened

Even if religious practice and belief are viewed as the first identifiable poison, @Moliere's placement of his thread in Ethics is perhaps more appealing.

The continuing patriarchy of religion, rulers and royalty is stamped on currency and postage, God's sake!
The changing guard of Charles III...the numbered list of Popes.
So it goes. Never-ending. Or so it seems...

Stamped on and stumped.

@Moliere - my earlier post (you either missed or ignored) re ethics and 'morality police' was in response to this stand-alone post:

I like this because "should" finally entered the theory -- I really believe this is a topic in ethics more than ontology/epistemology! But it's hard to get there. — Moliere

At the time, I didn't realise it was a follow-up to this: 'should'. See underlined.

Toxic masculinity is an identity of the masculine which identifies itself with power, and the feminine with love, and denies itself the feminine. If you feel love, the feminine, then that is a weakness which the powerful wouldn't need to succumb to, and insofar that you feel love you should act to purge it to become a real man. — Moliere

Well, that is one way of looking at it. But I'm not sure it makes sense. Is 'love' seen as toxic?
Do the powerful and privileged masculine (including women) not feel love?

I think the term 'toxic masculinity' could be explored further together with 'toxic femininity'.
Their origins and what they mean to different people.
Right now, I don't have the time for careful consideration, so here are first found references.
There will be heaps more out there...from all kinds of perspectives...

Everyday examples of toxic masculinity in relationships, schools and workplaces:

[*] When a boy in school doesn't act in traditionally masculine ways, and he is bullied by the boys in his class for being "too feminine"
[*] When a boy cries and his father tells him to "toughen up" or that "men don't cry"
[*] When a man calls women "sluts" or "whores" for having sex outside of monogamous relationships
[*] When a man tells his partner what they can and cannot wear, and who they are and are not allowed to spend time with
[*] The violence against trans women that occurs every year by men who are threatened by a perceived violation of gender norms
[*] When men criticize other men for being attracted to, or in relationships with, trans women
[*] When a man is afraid to be emotionally vulnerable with his partner for fear of seeming "weak"
[*] When a man who is struggling with his mental health doesn't want to see a therapist because he should "man up" or "power through it" — What is toxic masculinity - verywellmind

***
Toxic femininity

If toxic masculinity encourages violence and domination in order to uphold an unequal power dynamic, then toxic femininity supports silent acceptance of violence and domination in order to survive.
[...]
Like toxic masculinity, toxic femininity is the product of a patriarchal society. These toxic notions of femininity further deny women agency or identity. That said, discussions of the term outside of academic spaces can verge on the antifeminist side. They are used as a reactionary argument against feminist discussions of toxic masculinity. — What is toxic femininity - verywellmind

What I think is interesting is the word 'toxic'. If there is a part of humanity which is deemed 'toxic' as in poisonous, what is the antidote?

Before we can engage students in conversations about “masculinity” or “femininity,” toxic or otherwise, we should begin with a few key ideas about gender. Researchers have shown that there is very little difference between the brains of men and women. While gender identity is a deeply held feeling of being male, female or another gender, people of different genders often act differently, not because of biological characteristics but because of rigid societal norms created around femininity and masculinity. Laying this groundwork requires effort, but in an age when breaking news alerts make us want to look away from our phones, the term “toxic masculinity” provides a useful tool for engaging with students, families and anyone else trying to make sense of the onslaught of news. — Toxic Masculinity - Learning for Justice

First, identify the poison.
Isn't that what a Pragmatist or pragmatist would do? @Ciceronianus @t clark @universeness @unenlightened...?

I like this because "should" finally entered the theory -- I really believe this is a topic in ethics more than ontology/epistemology! But it's hard to get there. — Moliere

Yes. Isn't that why you posted the thread in the 'Ethics' subforum?
Why is it hard to get to a 'should'? Is this all Hume's fault? The is-ought problem?

When you see something that is clearly wrong, isn't there an impulse to do something about it?
But not everybody knows or cares enough about whatever 'it' might be.
Some believe it is above their pay grade.
Sometimes, we feel helpless, frustrated, and impotent. After all, what power do we have?

However, when enough people are adversely affected, there can be spontaneous collective action. Sometimes there can be coordinated efforts by different activist groups.
Unfortunately, even after apparent success or progress, the problem is shown never to have gone away.

Today, I read of Iran's 'reinstatement' of the 'morality police': 'to deal with civilians who “ignore the consequences of not wearing the proper hijab and insist on disobeying the norms”.
This comes 2 months ahead of anniversary of the death in custody of Mahsa Amini for not properly wearing the Islamic headscarf.

Among those killed during protests after Amini’s death was Minoo Majidi, a 62-year-old mother who was shot with 167 pellets. She reportedly said to her family before attending protests in Kermanshah: ‘If I don’t go out and protest, who else will?’ Her daughter Mahsa Piraei said her mother always valued women’s rights and freedom. — No other option but to fight - Iranian women defiance against morality police

***
I admit my ignorance. I had wrongly assumed that those policing the women, in what some term 'gender apartheid' by the clerical regime, would be a male-only force. So, I was surprised when I looked at the Guardian's headline photograph of 'Two veiled ‘morality police’ approach women on the streets of Tehran.' Then again, there is nothing new about women v women. Females are not all 'sisters'. Just as males are not all 'brothers'.
So, who are the morality police?

For most of the 1980s and 1990s, the Komiteh was comprised of religiously devout followers of the regime who joined the force at the encouragement of clerics. However, by the early 2000s, Iran’s population was comprised mostly of young people. When Ahmadinejad made the Komiteh an official police force, a number of young men joined to fulfill their mandatory military conscription. This younger generation was more lax than their older counterparts, leading to inconsistent patrolling. — Who are Iran's Morality Police? - The Conversation

And here we have it. A question for @wonderer1: Is this a result of 'evolutionary psychology'?
A changing sense of morality? Young men unwilling to act against their modern (possibly secular) beliefs yet are forced to do so.

A line from the film 'Australia':
Just because something 'is', doesn't mean it should be.
Who polices the 'morality police'?

Thank you for your response.

I read ( mostly scrolled) a few SEP and wiki articles on the subject and can't say I'm any the wiser.
Too many sub-theories, criticisms, objections, and responses. What's new!?
Perhaps if you ever decide to start a thread, I might learn how it can be used in a practical way.

As for the 'intuition' aspect and your story, there are so many variables to take into account as to what happened, why and how...depending on which one you plug in, it could all have turned out very different.
Even 'good luck' that the drunk was compliant.

However, I think my participation in this thread has come to a natural end. I've learned a lot more than I expected but after 16 pages...yeah, enough already. Time to rest up.

Other aspects and questions related to the #MeToo Movement

Regarding Hollywood's power structure:

On 15 October, actress Alyssa Milano suggested on Twitter that anyone who had been "sexually harassed or assaulted" should reply to her Tweet with "Me Too", to demonstrate the scale of the problem. Half a million people responded in the first 24 hours.
A barrage of allegations has since emerged against high-profile men in entertainment, the media, politics, and tech. Many deny any wrongdoing. The repercussions are still in flux, but Hollywood's power dynamics have undoubtedly shifted.

That's less obviously true in the world beyond, and begs the question: What's different for the millions of ordinary people who shared their own #MeToo stories? Are the currents of the movement visible in their lives too? How far has the rallying cry been converted into real-world change?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-44045291

Another relevant question to consider
#MeToo or #MenToo?
What are the implications of #MeToo for understanding current expressions of backlash and masculinity politics?

Since #MeToo took the Internet by storm in 2017, it has had transnational social and legal ramifications. However, there has been little research on the repercussions of this movement for the ways in which masculinity has been politicized as questions around its meaning and place in gender relations were brought to the forefront of public discussions. Thirteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants from two Western Anglophone men’s groups, one embracing and one opposing feminist ideas. Our findings demonstrate a qualitative shift in contemporary expressions of “backlash” and “masculinity politics” in the #MeToo era compared to their initial formulations in the wake of the women’s and men’s movements of the 1960s to 1980s, shaped by novel tropes and tactics.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/10608265211035794

An aspect of this is that I would expect the courage of women to tend to show up most strongly in defense of their offspring (and perhaps children in general). I think the trope of the human 'mama bear' fits well with this. Men I would expect to be more inclined to band together with other men, in defense of the whole social group. — wonderer1

This seems to be quite a narrow expectation of where 'courage' shows up. Especially, if we are talking about increasing social awareness of gender issues and the like. Of course, people will look to their own first and foremost. Survival of the fittest comes into it.
However, many women and men do not have or even desire offspring. Also, it's difficult to band together to deal with holistic and systemic structural inequalities and problems. Important issues perhaps not even recognised as undermining people's circumstances and abilities to progress. To fitness and wellbeing.

It takes courage to stand up for change. But even then, when a 'movement' [*] like #MeToo starts up, it can exclude significant others. The media tend to focus on prominent white women. Fair enough if it draws immediate attention but not good enough for those women who stand up but whose voices are unheard.

Overall, the #MeToo movement has raised consciousness of women’s sexual objectification on a global scale. But we still have a lot to learn. That is, we need to be more intersectional. We need to listen to all women which includes listening to women of colour, working class women, trans women, disabled women and the list can go on. We need to acknowledge the various forms of inequality and how they operate, intersect and reinforce each other. We must stand with each other, understand each other and speak out against all inequality in order to build a brighter and more equal society. As Kimberlé Crenshaw put it, “if we aren’t intersectional, some of us, the most vulnerable, are going to fall through the cracks”. — The #MeToo Movement: Intersectionality - Glasgow Women's Library

[*]

Sarah J Jackson, a professor of communication studies at Northeastern University, believes context is the key to anchoring Me Too.
"I wouldn't call hashtag 'Me Too' a movement at all," she says. "I would call it a campaign that is part of a larger movement. So I would call women's rights the movement, and feminism the movement. And I would say #MeToo is one indication of the sort of conversations that need to happen.

"The next step is, OK so now we know the problem - how do we as a global community expand this conversation?" — What has #MeToo actually changed? - BBC News

OK, I read about 'intersectionality' and thought I had a grasp. However, this moving 18 min video is powerful in its presentation and its graphics. Understanding and awareness increased by :100:

A TED talk - The urgency of intersectionality | Kimberlé Crenshaw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=akOe5-UsQ2o

Now more than ever, it's important to look boldly at the reality of race and gender bias -- and understand how the two can combine to create even more harm. Kimberlé Crenshaw uses the term "intersectionality" to describe this phenomenon; as she says, if you're standing in the path of multiple forms of exclusion, you're likely to get hit by both. In this moving talk, she calls on us to bear witness to this reality and speak up for victims of prejudice.

Oh, thanks for that quick reply and links. SEP always good. :up: :smile:

Maybe that's a weak version of intersectionality though, I'm claiming that some of the time it makes sense to try it for some problems, rather than it ought to be the primary viewpoint used for formulating those problems. — fdrake

Just to say that when you first used the word ' intersectionality' I didn't know what it meant.
I found this and emailed the link to myself for later perusal. I share it here now. Lest I forget.
https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/2019/5/20/18542843/intersectionality-conservatism-law-race-gender-discrimination

[...] In my conversations with right-wing critics of intersectionality, I’ve found that what upsets them isn’t the theory itself. Indeed, they largely agree that it accurately describes the way people from different backgrounds encounter the world. The lived experiences — and experiences of discrimination — of a black woman will be different from those of a white woman, or a black man, for example. They object to its implications, uses, and, most importantly, its consequences, what some conservatives view as the upending of racial and cultural hierarchies to create a new one.

But Crenshaw isn’t seeking to build a racial hierarchy with black women at the top. Through her work, she’s attempting to demolish racial hierarchies altogether.

[...] But Crenshaw said that contrary to her critics’ objections, intersectionality isn’t “an effort to create the world in an inverted image of what it is now.” Rather, she said, the point of intersectionality is to make room “for more advocacy and remedial practices” to create a more egalitarian system.

[...] Indeed, intersectionality is intended to ask a lot of individuals and movements alike, requiring that efforts to address one form of oppression take others into account. Efforts to fight racism would require examining other forms of prejudice (like anti-Semitism, for example); efforts to eliminate gender disparities would require examining how women of color experience gender bias differently from white women (and how nonwhite men do too, compared to white men).

Thanks again. It does indeed look good. Not sure if I want to buy it though! If you ever read it, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts. Please let me know :sparkle:

I know of a pragmatist I admire who is a woman. She's Susan Haack, a valiant defender of pragmatism from the vagaries of such as Rorty, who thinks Dewey was a postmodernist before postmodernism became popular. I don't know if she qualifies as a feminist. — Ciceronianus

Thanks for the introduction to Susan Haack. After reading an in-depth and lengthy interview of Susan Haack by Richard Carrier (2012) I can see why you would admire her and her work. I've just picked a few bits out:

Three papers she wrote involved a challenging look at her own career 'in uncomfortable ways' and speaking candidly.
1. “The Best Man for the Job may be a Woman” (1998), - her reflections on 'preferential hiring of women in our profession,' which apparently was only reviewed, appreciated and challenged a decade later.
Nobody wanted to touch it.
2. “Preposterism and Its Consequences” (1996), on her negative views of the culture of grants-and-research-projects.
3. “Out of Step” (2011) - on the erosion of academic ethics.

According to Haack, her writing represented 'something of the power of thinking things through and the value of plain speech.'

During the interview, she replies to questions as to the 'difficulties and annoyances' faced as a woman seeking an academic position and in her life of philosophy. Similar to other stories: 'the chairman opened the proceedings by assuring me that he had nothing against the employment of married women, he thought they might be quite good for the women students. I told him—vamping it up just a little—that actually I hoped to be good for the men (too). And that, naturally, was that.'

Haack also clear that any problems might not have arisen because she was female but because of her other characteristics:

For one thing, I’m very independent: rather than follow philosophical fads and fashions, I pursue questions I believe are important, and tackle them in the ways that seem most likely to yield results; I am beholden to no clique or citation cartel; I put no stock in the ranking of philosophy graduate programs over which my colleagues obsess; I accept no research or travel funds from my university; I avoid publishing in journals that insist on taking all the rights to my work; etc., etc. Naturally, this independence comes at a price; but it also earns me the freedom to do the best work I can, without self-censorship, and to communicate with a much wider audience than the usual “niche literature” does — Interview with Susan Haack - Richard Carrier blogs

Re the question of whether or no Haack was/is a feminist. Apparently, there was an incident when a (female) faculty member at another university, 'disapproving of my old-fashioned style of feminism', had encouraged graduate students to stay away from her lectures.
I get the impression that she would not label herself a feminist as such but instead puts certain principles into practice. A holistic perspective.

She expresses unease about the questioner's focus on getting more women into the profession of philosophy.

The aim should be to get the most thoughtful, creative, discriminating, honest, philosophically constructive people into the profession; and—essential to achieving this goal—to prevent such irrelevant factors as a person’s sex (or race) from distorting our judgment of the quality of his or her mind. If only we could achieve this, artificial attempts to create “diversity” would be unnecessary.

The interview is fascinating and cutting; delving into questions of what (real) philosophy is, atheism, criticisms of fragmentation and pretentious, self-important 'worldviews'.
I realise that this is getting away from the thread topic and my question re feminist pragmatists.
So, here's one BTL comment I found interesting. Shame no reply from Haack:

Susan Haack says: “the kind of feminism that appeals to me places the stress on what all of us, regardless of sex, have in common as human beings, and on the vitally important differences between one individual and another. This is why your hypothetical generic-woman-aspiring-to-be-a-philosopher strikes me a distraction at best… I am saddened to think how glacially slow our progress seems to be towards acknowledging the simple fact that, just like men, women are all different, and, as Dorothy Sayers put it many decades ago, shouldn’t be expected “to toddle along all in a flock, like sheep.”

No doubt, she’s more than right: Women are different individuals. Look at Susan Haack versus Dorothy Murdock. Reason versus fantastic beliefs. The contrast is striking.

Still, the ideal of focusing only on what “all of us…have in common as human beings”, making abstraction of all other particulars, such as, in this case, erasing the difference in sex is illusory — one of the great tenets of the fallacy of imposing PC ideology on the working of the brain.

The “human being” as such doesn’t exist. This is an abstraction conceived by the Enlightenment, in its fight agains the rules of gods. Only physical persons do exist. Those are the characteristics immediately perceived in encountering another “human being”: sex, age, ethnic markers, native environment, then friendly or hostile intentions, face, hair, dress, language, religious beliefs etc…Those are vital components of social recognition and vital to our survival.

The dream of erasing the social and biological particularities of life is the goal of political correctness, but it is a self-imposed illusion, a modern form of ideology trying to enforce an abstraction as another primary, immediate belief.

But the abstraction of the modern “human being” remains in fact the product of a long chain of rational thinking that cannot of itself erase the immediate modes of brain functions. It may with the help of sanctions and enforcement control behavior, and play a big role in political and legal theorizing, but it will not become a spontaneous belief of “fast thinking”.

So, sex, age, language, native origins do remain a factor in the formation of the self. Even John Locke would have to admit it.

And so, of course, Susan Haack does give us an excellent reminder to refresh our acquaintance with John Locke’s ” Of the Conduct of the Understanding”, and perhaps to review the whole life of John Locke as well.

Enough already. This is becoming tedious. As such, I will no longer be responding to your comments.

If such criticisms are expressed with some wisdom and nuance, obviously I would not consider that man-hating.

However, some people seem to slip into these sorts of discussions and take it as a carte blanche to vent their personal grievances with men on the rest of the world. Suddenly gestures of genuine affection become symbols of male oppression, and fatherhood becomes a means of enacting a power fantasy (as per one of the articles that was linked earlier).

Such ideas are vile, destructive and sexist.

In any other context they would be immediately recognized as such, but here they seem to get a pass just because there might be some merit to the wider discussion. And they shouldn't.

When I see things like this going repeatedly unchallenged, I feel the need to speak up. — Tzeentch

This post was addressed to @fdrake as a complaint against 'some people' and their 'vile, destructive and sexist' ideas. Apparently, they have been given a 'pass' which they shouldn't have.

I am confident that @fdrake will respond to this in his usual measured way.
If any such people and ideas are found, then action will be taken.

What are your thoughts regarding the suggestion that 'pragmatists and feminists are necessary partners'?
— Amity

I don't know much about feminist philosophy beyond what gets out in public, which I'm sure is not representative. What I see on TV and read about is anything but pragmatic. Pragmatists focus on solving problems. I don't see that in public feminism. — T Clark

Appreciate your positive contribution. Like you, I don't know much about feminist philosophy. Haven't really been all that interested until @Moliere started this discussion. In the last 18 days, I have read and reflected on posts and useful links before attempting my own replies. Still have a lot of questions...and still to catch up on those linked to by e.g. @fdrake.

I don't know that I'd even paid attention to 'public feminism'.
What do you include in that category? Youtube videos ? Open articles by academic feminist philosophers or radical activists...? They can address or highlight problems or issues related to gender but don't necessarily solve them. Some feminists might be pragmatic, but not all are Pragmatists.

With regards to the big P of Pragmatism (philosophy) - I don't know as much as I would like.

Pragmatism carries an everyday meaning as being practical, paying attention to the particular context in which you find yourself and not being weighed down by doctrine or ideology.

[...] Pragmatism is not a methodology and pragmatic principles can inform many kinds of research. However the logical stance of a Pragmatic inquiry is to be action oriented – there is close link between pragmatism and action research for example (Hammond, 2015). Pragmatists will see knowledge as fallible. Past research can inform action however researchers cannot claim to offer ‘anywhere, anytime’ answers or incontrovertible ‘best practice’ (for example, Biesta and Burbules, 2003). — what is pragmatism?warwick.ac.uk

I don't think that feminists and pragmatists are necessary partners.
However, a combination sounds like something I want to explore further.

Yes. I don't always understand a point of view. Your thread has been helpful in teasing out thoughts and attitudes. Thank you :flower:

Thank you. I'll need to read your post again later. Most of it makes perfect sense to me on a first read but there are a few bits I think I need to look at again. Later...or not :flower: