Toxic Masculinity. When the woke say “toxic masculinity,” they basically mean a male who is acting aggressively, especially if it is oppressive toward women. The term has expanded to include all traits of what is considered traditionally masculine, like playing with trucks or wrestling. So, if a man is yelling in anger at a woman, he is displaying “toxic masculinity” (as opposed to a person who just happens to be upset at someone). The term “toxic masculinity” is tricky because rarely, if ever, does it apply to men with dark skin. For example, if a man with dark skin is yelling in anger at a woman, he is not displaying toxic masculinity. He is justifiably upset, ultimately, because of some injustice in the system. The oppression he feels from the system is causing him to yell as opposed to him displaying toxic masculinity.
You are very fair minded. You dead pan all of these, you aren't rolling your eyes, and you don't critique them.
So: have you had any comments from "the woke" themselves? It would seem that they might be OK with this project. After all, presumably, they want people to know what they are talking about when they use these non-obvious terms like "lived identity" and "toxic masculinity".
I think most of us had a general gestalt level understanding of many of the terms, like Toxic Masculinity.
At some point, after you've defined and explained all these terms are you going to move into the critique of them (which, obviously your letter to PSU was a strong critique).
I guess I'm curious why you've backed off so much, and are not sort of neutrally cataloging their vocabulary. While their fruit of their ideology, all around us is a failing civilization (See: Portland, Oregon).
I hope we can move on soon to the next phase of the project.
You are very fair minded. You dead pan all of these, you aren't rolling your eyes, and you don't critique them.
So: have you had any comments from "the woke" themselves? It would seem that they might be OK with this project. After all, presumably, they want people to know what they are talking about when they use these non-obvious terms like "lived identity" and "toxic masculinity".
I think most of us had a general gestalt level understanding of many of the terms, like Toxic Masculinity.
At some point, after you've defined and explained all these terms are you going to move into the critique of them (which, obviously your letter to PSU was a strong critique).
I guess I'm curious why you've backed off so much, and are not sort of neutrally cataloging their vocabulary. While their fruit of their ideology, all around us is a failing civilization (See: Portland, Oregon).
I hope we can move on soon to the next phase of the project.