APA declares traditional masculinity pathological

[Ors Might]

The first few paragraphs are an MRA manifesto about shit that has nothing to do with the APA. I love it.

"NO WAGE GAP" lmao

Also, the document lies in the first paragraph of its complaint???

The American Psychology Association has recently proclaimed that masculinity is a form of (or a driving factor for) mental illness.
29

What the APA actually said was that traditional masculinity was psychologically harmful. Very curious that the authors of this glossed over that key adjective. Which raises the question: are the MRAs behind this filing reactionaries trying to sneak their traditionalism past the radar? Or maybe they're just terrible readers?

And the source they cite has the receipts for it too:

The main thrust of the subsequent research is that traditional masculinity—marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression—is, on the whole, harmful. Men socialized in this way are less likely to engage in healthy behaviors. For example, a 2011 study led by Kristen Springer, PhD, of Rutgers University, found that men with the strongest beliefs about masculinity were only half as likely as men with more moderate masculine beliefs to get preventive health care (Journal of Health and Social Behavior, Vol. 52, No. 2). And in 2007, researchers led by James Mahalik, PhD, of Boston College, found that the more men conformed to masculine norms, the more likely they were to consider as normal risky health behaviors such as heavy drinking, using tobacco and avoiding vegetables, and to engage in these risky behaviors themselves (Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 64, No. 11).

This masculine reluctance toward self-care extends to psychological help. Research led by Omar Yousaf, PhD, found that men who bought into traditional notions of masculinity were more negative about seeking mental health services than those with more flexible gender attitudes (Psychology of Men & Masculinity, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2015).

For this reason, mental health professionals need to be aware that men are often reluctant to admit vulnerability, says Fredric Rabinowitz, PhD, a psychologist at the University of Redlands in California who has stewarded the new guidelines since 2005, when he was president of APA Div. 51 (Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinities).

“Because of the way many men have been brought up—to be self-sufficient and able to take care of themselves—any sense that things aren’t OK needs to be kept secret,” Rabinowitz says. “Part of what happens is men who keep things to themselves look outward and see that no one else is sharing any of the conflicts that they feel inside. That makes them feel isolated. They think they’re alone. They think they’re weak. They think they’re not OK. They don’t realize that other men are also harboring private thoughts and private emotions and private conflicts."

In the first paragraph, those just seem like common conceptions of masculine traits. As the APA describes it, there’s little difference between traditional masculinity and conventional masculinity. The only seeming distinction is the intensity one might have for them.

[Ostroeuropa]

Text of the filing. (The actual filing is only 9 pages; the rest is an appendix of the APA guidelines attached as evidence.)

The first few paragraphs are an MRA manifesto about shit that has nothing to do with the APA. I love it.

"NO WAGE GAP" lmao

Also, the document lies in the first paragraph of its complaint???

The American Psychology Association has recently proclaimed that masculinity is a form of (or a driving factor for) mental illness.
29

What the APA actually said was that traditional masculinity was psychologically harmful. Very curious that the authors of this glossed over that key adjective. Which raises the question: are the MRAs behind this filing reactionaries trying to sneak their traditionalism past the radar? Or maybe they're just terrible readers?

Establishing the prevalence of discrimination against men internationally is important also because getting that info in early forces the opposing side to contest that if they don't want it heard in court. (I.E, they can object and suppress the notion that discrimination against men is real if you don't bring up that information beforehand because you didn't submit it to the court.)

There wage gap exists as he notes, single women earn more than single men. The wage gap point is also relevant as it was brought up in the APA thing, supposedly to do with men and masculinity, but they couldn't resist tipping their hand and showing their real intentions. It's relevant to the case to point out their sexist bias there. (Seriously, every single piece of information has to be submitted before hand and if the opposing side contests its legitimacy, it doesn't get its day in court. If you try and bring up facts you haven't submitted beforehand, it'll be objected to and the jury instructed to ignore it.). This is merely the first round of information the claimant thinks they might need at trial, and let's not forget its a common feminist tactic to waffle on and on about the discrimination women face in order to shut down the notion men face discrimination on an issue in isolation.

Bias in the education system is especially relevant and demonstrates the accused has a history of this and a systemic problem. It lends the claim more weight, and the title 9 adjudication is also very relevant as it shows that the universities idea of gender equality is at odds with the courts.

The chilling effect is also relevant and very toxic, it's one of the worst aspects of feminism and it's due to their century long refusal to admit misandry was real while demonizing and psychologically/socially abusing anyone who said so. Even now only a minority admit it. Men have been terrorized into silence on the topic and it goes a long way toward establishing a hostile environment, and especially relevant given the feminist tilt of the APA guidelines. By demonstrating men are terrorized into silence on the topic of feminism and live in fear of speaking out, they can demonstrate the APA guidelines are de-facto hostile, since they are also feminist orthodoxy.

No Lir, that's your and other feminists sad attempt at damage control. There's a number of telling slip ups in the guidelines, such as;

For many, the crux of working with
men is the understanding that masculinity is both associated with a wide range
of health (physical and mental) concerns
and less willingness to seek help for those
problems (Addis & Mahalik, 2003)

This one straight up disproves what you said here. But let's carry on.

Research has carefully detailed the role of
masculinity in aggression (both verbal and
physical) against those who do not conform to strict gender narratives, leading to
violent and often fatal hate crimes against
transgender and gender-nonconforming
people (Kelley & Gruenewald, 2014).

+

cisgender masculinity expression
is the expected norm

(Note, treating it like there's only one cisgender masculinity.).

aspects of masculinity has been connected to sexual assault
perpetration

Family, peers,
and media often reinforce the connection
between aggressive behavior and masculinity

They don't merely talk about traditional masculinity. They do a lot, but not all the time. Probably because they're citing different people and their arguments and it's more about spouting feminist shite than helping men, Lir. That's why the feminists not deft enough to call it "traditional" masculinity got included too. Because the APA doesn't give a shit about "traditional" or not. It's about attacking masculinity in general because it's a project to propogandize to men to make them "Good allies" and pretend feminists care about men too, and they cited all the feminists they could to do that. Your problem is YOU'D describe it as traditional masculinity, and you're gravitating to the citations that also do so. Your denial over the extent of misandry in the feminist movement did you a disservice, and you didn't notice.

This is a microcosm of your behavior with the movement in general too tbh.

Imagine guidelines on how to treat men written by the feminist movement. The whole of it. You don't get to decide who isn't included.
Still think this isn't a sexist piece of shit?

Moreover, the APA has no such guidelines about femininity, especially relevant to their "Make men allies" comment and their emphasis on constructing "Non-sexist" forms of masculinity and how psychologists should construct them in clients. (This assumes they aren't already there, by the way.).
Relevant given the studies on womens in group bias and chauvinism compared to men, and the relation women have with their gender identity.

[Liriena]

The first few paragraphs are an MRA manifesto about shit that has nothing to do with the APA. I love it.

"NO WAGE GAP" lmao

Also, the document lies in the first paragraph of its complaint???

The American Psychology Association has recently proclaimed that masculinity is a form of (or a driving factor for) mental illness.
29

What the APA actually said was that traditional masculinity was psychologically harmful. Very curious that the authors of this glossed over that key adjective. Which raises the question: are the MRAs behind this filing reactionaries trying to sneak their traditionalism past the radar? Or maybe they're just terrible readers?

Establishing the prevalence of discrimination against men internationally is important also because getting that info in early forces the opposing side to contest that if they don't want it heard in court. (I.E, they can object and suppress the notion that discrimination against men is real if you don't bring up that information beforehand because you didn't submit it to the court.)

So it's a legal trick to force "le evil feminists" of the APA to engage you in an ideological debate about all gender politics worldwide before they can get anywhere near arguing against the actual accusations?

Very cool.

No Lir, that's your and other feminists sad attempt at damage control.

Ah, I see we're back to pluralizing me as part of the big, nefarious other who is actively conspiring to "damage control". It's always nice to be otherized like that.

Everyone who disagrees with me is part of le evil feminist conspiracy - an MRA story

Also, going back to what I previously copypasted:

The main thrust of the subsequent research is that traditional masculinity—marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression—is, on the whole, harmful. Men socialized in this way are less likely to engage in healthy behaviors. For example, a 2011 study led by Kristen Springer, PhD, of Rutgers University, found that men with the strongest beliefs about masculinity were only half as likely as men with more moderate masculine beliefs to get preventive health care (Journal of Health and Social Behavior, Vol. 52, No. 2). And in 2007, researchers led by James Mahalik, PhD, of Boston College, found that the more men conformed to masculine norms, the more likely they were to consider as normal risky health behaviors such as heavy drinking, using tobacco and avoiding vegetables, and to engage in these risky behaviors themselves (Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 64, No. 11).

This masculine reluctance toward self-care extends to psychological help. Research led by Omar Yousaf, PhD, found that men who bought into traditional notions of masculinity were more negative about seeking mental health services than those with more flexible gender attitudes (Psychology of Men & Masculinity, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2015).

For this reason, mental health professionals need to be aware that men are often reluctant to admit vulnerability, says Fredric Rabinowitz, PhD, a psychologist at the University of Redlands in California who has stewarded the new guidelines since 2005, when he was president of APA Div. 51 (Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinities).

“Because of the way many men have been brought up—to be self-sufficient and able to take care of themselves—any sense that things aren’t OK needs to be kept secret,” Rabinowitz says. “Part of what happens is men who keep things to themselves look outward and see that no one else is sharing any of the conflicts that they feel inside. That makes them feel isolated. They think they’re alone. They think they’re weak. They think they’re not OK. They don’t realize that other men are also harboring private thoughts and private emotions and private conflicts."

It feels to me like the supposed changes in wording have more to do with sticking to the language employed in the research they cite than with some nefarious plot to semi-secretly trash all masculinity. And in the guidelines themselves, traditional masculinity keeps getting emphasized.

They don't merely talk about traditional masculinity. They do a lot, but not all the time. Probably because they're citing different people and their arguments

Aw, man, I should have read all the way through. You ninja'd me in your own post. ;-;

Also, I'm confused... You keep complaining about the supposed evil motives behind these guidelines -which is a questionable approach-, but (and correct me if I simply missed it) I don't see you actually disputing the research used to support them.

[Galloism]

So it's a legal trick to force "le evil feminists" of the APA to engage you in an ideological debate about all gender politics worldwide before they can get anywhere near arguing against the actual accusations?

Very cool.

Actually, it's a legal trick to force a block to summary judgement of a slightly longer "men can't experience sexism and discrimination, lol - women are the ones oppressed", which has actually appeared in slightly longer legalese in various court decisions.

That being said, I wouldn't have gone with the wage gap argument. It seems superfluous. I would have been much more on point regarding the systematic discrimination against men in all levels of education - from kindergarten all the way through university. Setting that argument would be sufficient to block that summary judgement, and extremely on point.

[Liriena]

I would have been much more on point regarding the systematic discrimination against men in all levels of education

You mean the problems faced by boys in the education system that the APA guidelines acknowledge and encourage action on?

[Ostroeuropa]

I would have been much more on point regarding the systematic discrimination against men in all levels of education

You mean the problems faced by boys in the education system that the APA guidelines acknowledge and encourage action on?

They encourage psychologists be aware of them and fix mens mentalities as though that'll fix it. As noted, there were no inclusions on the femininity publication that they should teach women not to do this sort of damaging thing to children.

In other words they encourage feminist action on the topic, useless and face-saving, rather than something useful.

[Liriena]

You mean the problems faced by boys in the education system that the APA guidelines acknowledge and encourage action on?

They encourage psychologists be aware of them and fix mens mentalities as though that'll fix it.

Imagine that: psychologists providing therapy to patients to help them face systemic problems. It's almost as if that's... their line of work?

As noted, there were no inclusions on the femininity publication that they should teach women not to do this sort of damaging thing to children.

You mean this publication, right?

[Galloism]

I would have been much more on point regarding the systematic discrimination against men in all levels of education

You mean the problems faced by boys in the education system that the APA guidelines acknowledge and encourage action on?

They do no such thing. Here's the APA guidelines on education:

GUIDELINE 6
Psychologists strive to support
educational efforts that are
responsive to the needs of boys and
men.
Rationale
The provision of a high-quality education
characterized by a safe and supportive
learning environment, a challenging curriculum, and systematic career education
and counseling enhances the intellectual, emotional, and social development of
individuals and helps them to prepare for
their future roles in the community and
workforce (Foxx, Baker, & Gerler, 2017).
Boys who take advantage of educational opportunities are more likely to find
employment and earn higher salaries than
their peers who drop out of school (Bureau
of Labor Statistics, 2008); however, there
are data to suggest that a disproportionate number of boys are underperforming academically (Kena et al., 2014), and
although certain college majors continue
to be male dominated, men in general are
falling behind their female peers in higher
education (Kena et al., 2014). These problems appear to be particularly salient for
African American and Latino boys (Fergus,
Noguera, & Martin, 2014) and men (Kena
et al, 2014). Boys also face greater odds
of being diagnosed with a developmental disability (Boyle et al., 2011) that can
impair academic functioning and/or result
in placement in special education classes. Moreover, it is well documented that
boys of color are disproportionately punished more severely for similar behavioral issues compared to their White peers
(Skiba, Michael, Nardo, & Peterson, 2002),
and such practices are linked to more serious legal problems later in life for men of
color (Rios, 2011). Thus, helping boys to
overcome school-related challenges (e.g.,
structural, learning, educational, social,
etc.) is crucial because young men experiencing these problems are at risk of dropping out of school, earning less income,
changing jobs more often, and suffering
longer periods of unemployment than
males who complete high school and college (United States Department of Labor
Statistics, 2018). These types of labor-related difficulties are commonly a source of
significant stress (Kiselica et al., 2008).
Addressing the school-related problems of boys is also important, because
many of the problems posed by boys in
schools (e.g., classroom disruption, poor
organization, sexual harassment, bullying,
discourtesy) have a detrimental impact
on the academic and social experiences of other students (Juvonen, Wang, &
Espinoza, 2011; Lacey & Cornell, 2013).
There is also a clear link between school
failure and various other social problems,
including antisocial behavior, drug abuse,
high-risk sexual behavior, and premature
fatherhood, all of which place tremendous
social and economic burdens on society
(Bradford & Noble, 2000).
Moreover, aspects of masculinity ideology may contribute to the school-related
problems of boys (O’Neil & Luján, 2009).
Dysfunctional boy codes for behavior, such
as the belief that being studious is undesirable, suppress academic striving among
some boys (A.J. Franklin, 2004; Wilson,
2006). Constricted notions of masculinity
emphasizing aggression, homophobia, and
misogyny may influence boys to direct a
great deal of their energy into disruptive
behaviors such as bullying, homosexual
taunting, and sexual harassment rather
than healthy academic and extracurricular
activities (Steinfeldt, Vaughan, LaFollette,
& Steinfeldt, 2012).
Application
Psychologists strive to raise awareness
about the special academic, communication, and school-adjustment problems of
boys among teachers, educational support
staff, school administrators, parents, and
policy makers. Boys are more likely to be
diagnosed with ADHD (Arnett, Pennington,
Willcutt, DeFries, & Olson, 2015; Willicutt,
2012), likely because the presentation is
associated with problematic externalizing behaviors (e.g., classroom disruption).
Girls with ADHD often have more attentional issues than hyperactivity issues,
which are not as noticeable (Ruckledge,
2010). Thus, psychologists can be mindful
of the existing diagnostic criteria for ADHD
and not let the client’s gender influence
the diagnosis (Bruchmüller et al., 2012).
Because many school-related difficulties
for boys emerge at an early age, psychologists can initiate changes in practices that
will enhance the early school adjustment
of boys who are struggling academically,
such as remedial reading instruction, training behavioral inhibition, and providing verbal experience (Eliot, 2009). Psychologists
are also encouraged to engage boys in
strength-based experiential groups to
promote friendships and support among
boys while helping them critically examine dysfunctional boy codes and restrictive notions of masculinity (Mortola et al.,
2007).
Psychologists strive to assist school
officials with the development of anti-bullying policies and implementation of
anti-bullying campaigns (Orpinas & Horne,
2010). Children with disabilities—sensory,
cognitive, and physical disabilities—are
disproportionately impacted by bullying
(Simpson, Rose, & Ellis, 2016), with some
evidence suggesting that boys engage in
higher rates of cyberbullying (Heiman &
Olenik-Shemesh, 2015). Further, because
sexual harassment and bullying of sexual
minority youth is an especially common
problem exhibited by boys in schools, it is
recommended that school policies contain
specific language addressing bullying associated with sexism, racism, and homophobia (Kiselica et al., 2008). Psychologists
are encouraged to develop strategies to
assist both perpetrators and victims of bullying, helping perpetrators to be accountable for their behavior, as well as to distinguish between healthy and unhealthy uses
of power and understand how their misuse
of power hurts others; and helping victims
recover from trauma and engage in risk
reduction (Reese, Horne, Bell, & Wingfield,
2008; Wilson, 2006). Psychologists are
thus encouraged to assist in the development of positive school climates (Olweus
& Limber, 2010; Orpinas & Horne, 2010);
this can be accomplished through modeling nonrestrictive masculinity behaviors,
awareness of appropriate limit setting, and
affirming and encouraging positive behaviors (Wilson, 2006; Kiselica et al., 2008).
Psychologists also strive to promote
the career development and workforce
readiness of boys and men. Ideally, developmental career counseling and education
begins with boys at the grade school level
and continues into the high school years
with services designed to assist young
men to choose a career and make the transition into the workforce or higher education (Foxx et al., 2017). A particular focus
of career education with boys includes
encouraging them to explore the full range
of career options, not just those that men
have traditionally pursued. In addition,
psychologists strive to address the difficult
barriers and the culture-specific issues
impeding the educational and career
development of racial and ethnic minority,
immigrant, boys with cognitive disabilities,
and low-income boys by creating partnerships with schools, health care facilities,
social service agencies, and businesses
to provide them with mentors to guide
and inspire educational striving, skills to
cope with stressful life circumstances, and
incentives to succeed in school, go on to
college, and enter the workforce (Kiselica
et al., 2008). For example, gender diverse
people are 3 times as likely as cisgender
people to be unemployed (S.E. James et al.,
2016)

https://www.apa.org/about/policy/boys-m ... elines.pdf

They do not once address teh systemic discrimination visited on boys by disproportionately female teachers - who mark them down because they are male. Punish them more for the same behaviors because they are male. Disproportionately involve law enforcement because they are male.

The only nod they give to this is with black boys, who they compare to their "white peers" (implication white male peers). They never once talk about the systemic discrimination faced by boys visited upon them by the teachers and administrators throughout their school life as compared to their female peers.

[Ostroeuropa]

I'm not sure how I want the case to go.

On the one hand, yet more court rulings that feminism violates mens human rights at university routinely would be nice, on the other, a Feminized psychology sector opens the door to Mens Rights counselling, especially as confidentiality would increase the likelihood of people partaking. It'd just need to be ordinary counselliing, perhaps a few things here or there, but mostly the perception would be the thing.

[Byzconia]

What the document says is not anything new in the psychological community, and in fact is fairly pro-men (if not pro-gender roles). It doesn't say "traditional masculinity" is pathological, as you claim; the summary in your OP is either intentionally incorrect or you didn't read the paper. There is some shaky science, particularly when it cites the Duluth Model, but I would hardly call the entire paper pseudoscience merely because you dislike the terminology used.
I highly recommend that everybody in this thread actually read the document before posting. It's only 30 pages.

Just wanted to say that I really love this post. I was originally going to just respond to the OP, but this post made me stop and look into the information being presented. Completely changed my approach.

[Ostroeuropa]

They encourage psychologists be aware of them and fix mens mentalities as though that'll fix it.

Imagine that: psychologists providing therapy to patients to help them face systemic problems. It's almost as if that's... their line of work?

As noted, there were no inclusions on the femininity publication that they should teach women not to do this sort of damaging thing to children.

You mean this publication, right?

It is the medicalization of a social issue. Akin to up and deciding that we should simply teach black people to cope mentally with racism and that'll fix the problem, and if they don't cope then they just need more therapy is all.

It is not a suitable thing for a psychologist to think they can fix. Suggesting it is the result of dysfunctions in feminist ideology that prevent them from properly combatting misandry.

Yes, that's the one. In the context of the lawsuit its critically important to compare the two and their treatment of these issues.

[Liriena]

Imagine that: psychologists providing therapy to patients to help them face systemic problems. It's almost as if that's... their line of work?


You mean this publication, right?

It is the medicalization of a social issue. Akin to up and deciding that we should simply teach black people to cope mentally with racism and that'll fix the problem, and if they don't cope then they just need more therapy is all.

It's the APA. They are a psychology association. They are not sociologists or economists. They are not a political party, a civil rights organization or a revolutionary vanguard. You can't complain that the APA is being used for political activism while also complain that the APA isn't trying to accomplish a systemic, sociopolitical change that would go beyond psychological research and therapy, which is their primary purpose.

[Galloism]

It is the medicalization of a social issue. Akin to up and deciding that we should simply teach black people to cope mentally with racism and that'll fix the problem, and if they don't cope then they just need more therapy is all.

It's the APA. They are a psychology association. They are not sociologists or economists. They are not a political party, a civil rights organization or a revolutionary vanguard. You can't complain that the APA is being used for political activism while also complain that the APA isn't trying to accomplish a systemic, sociopolitical change that would go beyond psychological research and therapy, which is their primary purpose.

It's all irrelevant anyway. They didn't provide guideance on therapy to help face systemic problems. They didn't even engage with or call out the systemic problems as being problems to be faced.

[Autarkheia]

The APA can't medicalize anything, strictly speaking, because they are not a medical organization but an academic one. The other APA (American Psychiatric Association) is the medical one.

For all we know, the schizos could be the wokest of us all.

Timecube is real!

[Tahar Joblis]

It is the medicalization of a social issue. Akin to up and deciding that we should simply teach black people to cope mentally with racism and that'll fix the problem, and if they don't cope then they just need more therapy is all.

It's the APA. They are a psychology association. They are not sociologists or economists. They are not a political party, a civil rights organization or a revolutionary vanguard. You can't complain that the APA is being used for political activism while also complain that the APA isn't trying to accomplish a systemic, sociopolitical change that would go beyond psychological research and therapy, which is their primary purpose.

These guidelines are for clinical psychologists. They are not guidelines for proposed research; they are represented as being a presentation of the current state of psychological research to clinicians.

They neither adequately represent the problems faced by men qua men (e.g., as in my recent pointed example in this thread on suicide, or as Galloism pointed out, discrimination against male students by female teachers) nor do they present a general consensus of psychological research. Nor does most of the research cited come from research on clinical techniques in psychology as applied to men; instead, most of the research is drawn selectively from corners of psychology most friendly to feminist junk science (in particular, much of the research cited is from social psych and educational psych journals).

It represents more of a consensus of the feminist perspective on masculine psychology, but this is an ideological perspective rather than a scientific one. It's not a completely worthless document, but it has major problems; many of the document's claims are controversial from a scientific perspective, but the document simply boldly embraces those claims.

I posted expert criticism right in the starting post of the thread. It has fairly similar though more polite things to say, e.g.:

Much of this was presented uncritically and without addressing the controversies behind some of these concepts. Much of this language would also tend to be identified mainly with the progressive movement, which tended to make it feel more ideological than scientifically objective and neutral.

At times the guidelines appear to push clinicians to challenge traditional masculinity or challenge
“male privilege”. But this appears to be a progressive advocacy agenda, not a clinical goal. I doubt it is productive to push clinicians to make this a standard goal for treatment with “traditional” men. I have skepticism that a male who comes for treatment for depression is going to benefit much from discussions of his privilege, for instance.

But it lacks the objectivity, balance and breadth of literature review, and concern for all backgrounds (rather than just some) that would be necessary for an APA endorsed practice guideline. Further, I suspect that, if clinicians were to implement some of the recommendations, the potential for harm to some clients is non-trivial.

(Emphases added.)

I can very well complain that the document is being used to push ideology and also complain that the document does not do anything to help clinicians address psychological problems that result from systemic issues with society. Knowing that one should be particularly sensitive to the risk of suicide when dealing with, say, an older white male patient who recently went through a divorce is useful information for clinicians.