I can't help but notice that "toxic femininity" is rarely discussed in media. Blame is assigned even when men are forced by circumstance to adhere to economic changes.
There is a big study across cultures that shows than men and women, both, show positive prejudice against unknown women and negative prejudice against unknown men. If you combine that with he simple 'victim' and 'oppressor' narrative nowadays, you end up at general hatred against men.
@@BenRobinson1974 Really? All over youtube.....let's do an experiement shall we? Open youtube, type "Toxic F" into the search bar......of the first 14 replies how many are about toxic femininity" ? Mine shows, zero
That's because it doesn't exist. "Toxic femininity" was made in direct response to "toxic masculinity". There is nothing toxic about femininity and there is nothing toxic about masculinity.
This was very interesting, about how one of the aspects of the Industrial Revolution changed our lives. Pre IR was a time we cannot imagine now when a community and farming and the family were paramount and of course your Church. This lady talks about re-connecting but the sexes are farther apart than ever. Some aspects of the feminist movements are spiteful to men and we have seen the rise of MGTOW and studies show men are more likely to come out worst in divorce, be homeless ,suffer depression and be made redundant in employment.
As a man who rails against man bashing which appears to have begun with Archie Bunker it is refreshing to see a woman who can stand back and comment on what was probably the greater sociological change in the last 1000 years, which was the industrial revolution which took men out of their household and made the mentorship of young men more of a chance encounter than it had ever been in history.
Actually, that is somewhat a flawed argument, what the lady said was that “fathers” increasingly became less involved in the mentorship of their own children as they took more industrial jobs in the ninetieth century thus eroding their connection to “their” family. That doesn’t address the increase of apprenticeships that also resulted from that technological change, mentorship of young men did happen it just happened from someone other than your father. I wonder what impact that might have had either positively or negatively on young men.
@@itsnotatoober The roles that existed back in the nineteen hundreds did not solely form the values by which people lived, and she never made that claim. She said that by men moving out of the family centric workspace during the industrial revolution, the already established values that were nurtured in such an environment, were eroded away. Almost all traditional societal underpinnings and value systems, regardless of culture, are centred on religion. That much isn't really disputed, even by atheist scholars and historians.
Mucks everything up 😂😂 I guess you'd rather live in the 18th century then, the best century as everyone calls it! Infant mortality to the roof, life expectancy of 35 🎉🎉
Toxic masculinity isn't so toxic when a woman gets a flat tire and she doesn't want to get her dress dirty replacing it. It amuses me that so many women decry "toxic masculinity" but want heroines in the movies and TV who do all the things they supposedly don't want men to do.
This is amazing, she articulates what I had thought about the industrial revolution and it's effects, not only did it take men out of the home, but they lost their lore.
I wonder if that's at least partially true because while on the farm or working in around the home, wives / families to could see the hours & exersion men put in each & every day. Once they left in the morning for "work" only to return home at night the dangers & level of physical work was no longer understood.Thus they began to be taken for granted.
@@kc6810 touch a nerve did we? how badly does your indoctrinated misandry need to flip anything back to "all women oppressed, all men oppressors"? You know it is allowed to give men some credit, that doesn't mean it's being taken away from women.
@@mikeabbasi4551 Sadly I’m a pushy and educated woman ha .. but I love the notion of the autonomous home built together by a father and mother.. That’s joy!❤
@@kc6810a lot of people died of everything. Historically men died more than women and that is true now but was even more true those days. So stop plating the victim, you always like yo thing that are the only ones that siufer that or the other, even now.
I was raised very atheistic, despite having a long history of activist religious relatives such as Roger Williams of Rhode Island. Now in my early 50s, after raising 2 kids and being married to far more traditional and spiritual Christian wife I see the clear connection between secular values and Judeo Christian values. The sense of right and wrong that so many young liberals think sprang from their own minds and hearts simply because they’re good people actually came from religious morality. Through this realization and in this manner I’ve gotten much closer to God, and for the better!
I still don't believe in God, like... at all, but just because a person in history was a religious person, doesn't mean they were dumb or didn't think thoroughly through things. Which obviously means that they might have had a good idea and then it would be silly to ignore said good idea. Doesn't mean one should take everything at face value of course.
Spanish here. Still in Spain people identify themselves with the family and the people they surround themselves with, not with a particular job or company, which are such attitudes we used to see in Anglo movies. Later in my career I noticed that the phenomenon is widespread in North Europe and Central Europe, people identity is built around a job, which for us seems quite absurd, because it is just one part of life and we do not give much shet about what a friend or family member does for a living as long as his/her persona is a match with ours. In summary you can say that it doesn’t matter to our society if you make six figures and run a bank if you’re completely detached from family and friends. You’re a homeless person with money, at best. Unfortunately much of the Anglo-Saxon way of prioritising individual achievements through work is coming more commonplace, but with a twist.
I do find it quite amusing when people talk about how their lives revolve around their careers, but also that it is not appropriate to look for or find romance/love in the workplace. Then they wonder why they cannot find a dating partner, let alone someone to start a family with.
Btw, I am mexican, we have similar culture but I think that in big cities is like in the usa, not as much but also revolving around the job. And it's interesting how Mexicans that go to the usa feel so empty, they say that people live to work, specially because they have their cities built around living very far from their jobs. But there is a phenomenon that many Americans re coming to Mexico to live, and the say that the primary reason is that they feel more like in a family and community... En in Mexico city that is a monster and difficult to live because traffic. In other places the family interaction is even more. How awful is to live like that .. for what? To be despressed all day all your life?
4:57 "we're not going to get a better class of men until we get a better class of fathers" - we're not going to get a better class of men until men CAN be fathers, and women stop aspiring to be single mothers. Blame men if you want, when they've paid a fortune in legal fees to get custody - but failed, or haven't even been told that they are fathers.
Anything to keep blaming men mate. They will literally grasp as anything to keep blaming men. It's always the mans fault, no matter what. Especially if you're a white man, then you are literally the devil incarnate, even though white men literally built the modern world over the last 150 years, and created the overwhelming amount of scientific discovery over the last 2000 years, we're still the worst thing to have ever existed.
@@wyleecoyotee4252 Historically men got child custody up until the mid 19th century. The tender years doctrine was passed quite literally to change that. You're just not even trying. You're not even making an effort. Such confident ignorance. Like a female. Eugh.
@@wyleecoyotee4252 I would recommend that you watch "the surprising origins of toxic masculinity" from 0:58 - books about raising children were addressed to men, because it was their responsibility. Men have had lots to do with raising their children, and when given chance, they still do.
@@wyleecoyotee4252 if men were never fathers, why would the word "farther" exist? Women used to take of kids when young, say 6 years, then the boys were given to the fathers to be turned into men. Maybe you missed this and were turned into a soyboy by your mother.
Whatever the cause she still manages to conclude that it is 'men misbehaving" To me it sounds like men were losing those very few choices they had and acting out of frustration. A process still going on today.
She pointed out that the toxic masculinity mindset was the original appearance of men misbehaving. She isn’t placing blame but pointing out facts of the cause and effect from taking men away from their homes
@@c.galindo9639 But she is though. The >actual< cause of all this supposed “male misbehavior” was the government removing male authority over his family. This was done indirectly via things like destruction of currency (the central banks, taxes etc…) and directly via destruction of work opportunities (the great depression, world wars…) all of which occurred in roughly the same period. Claiming that men started collectively “acting up” out of the blue just because work moved to factories is no different that the logic of the people she’s citing.
They figure there's a vague possibility of getting better fathers, because men might actually try. There's basically NO possibility of getting women to be better people, so not worth discussing.
@@johncrow5552 I feel we aren't going to get a better class of woman or men tell both are held accountable on an individual(rather then collective) level, the left hasn't been holding woman accountable(even encouraging woman to act like the worst stereotypes ever made about both woman and feminists) and aren't exactly committed to holding men accountable either(there support for Islamic fundamentalists shows this truth). Actually nearly everything that can make men toxic is being encouraged in the modern day( with the encouraging of criminal behaviour, demonization of men, pushing fathers out of the home and propping up of Islamic fundamentalists clearly making boy to gangster and boy to Islamic extremist pipelines) and then many people go surprise pickacu face when nearly every fear people on the right have starts coming true.
because it is childish, it is basically keeping the fire of blame and division going , instead of realising that both men and women have failed it is the equivalent of saying . ''I wont apologise until they do'' , crossing your arms and pouting
Completely disagree. Passing the buck not a solution. Men need to step up and not fall for the FAUX Cultural Marxist BS & "Man up" -- Who's going to defend your family? 5'2" 100lb woman or 6'2" 200lb man? Can't argue with Human Nature & Laws of Nature.
Prior to the Industrial Age, a Man only knew the ONE skill they were taught by their Fathers. If there was no need for that skill, their Families would starve. The Industrial Age forced Men to learn other skills, ones they would never have been exposed to or ever considered because of the Cast of Hereditary based on skills. Coopers, Millers, Weavers, Wrights, Smiths, etc.. Family names were based on what one did to earn a living. We lost things during the transition but we also gained things as well. New skills, knowledge, life experiences, new points of view, new cultures, new worlds, etc.. We simply forgot to reset our course and check our sails on the journey.
Absolutely laughable take. You think that prior to the Industrial revolution people didn't have to run their homesteads in addition to whatever they did to participate in the broader economy? That Mr. Smith didn't have a garden that he could grow food in? Couldn't hunt or fish? Just looked at his torn shirt hopelessly?
Knowing that Feminism began in around the 1850s with the stated goal of breaking the family structure, this is not surprising to me in the least. This is also around the same time that the term "The Patriarchy" began. "The Patriarchy" merely being a term that refers to "Father lead homes and families". ie, the Patriarch.
@@thecuttingsark5094 Which would mean that "The Patriarchy" is what? For info on the timeline. One example is the Seneca Falls meeting, and "The Declaration of Sentiments.
While this makes many valid and obvious points it misses a couple important ones. Men have increasingly had their “reason for existence” … their “role” … stripped away. Pre Industrial age a man brought to his family physical items made or “earned” by his own hands oftentimes the entire family was involved in working for their survival and all earned respect for doing their part. Today, the man’s importance is often undermined or lessened by the woman working as well in completely unrelated jobs. Men are often relegated to “bringing home a check” in effect becoming a rent paying tenant in their own home, family, life. The family spends the income without any understanding or care as to its source or what was required to make that income.
I feel like people in my home area avoid that harmful mindset(of treating the mans role as little more then a paying tenet) but rural parts of Canada are different then say, highly Urban areas that consistently vote left-win. The culture that is promoted in an area will set the tone for said area, with what is promoted by the people who live in said area having the strongest effect on the over all culture and tone. Individuals and societies get what they sow and nurture, often with innocent people suffering form the mistakes and wrong doings of authority figures(this becomes especially obvious when you look into say the effects of poor parenting, teachers abusing there position and irresponsible/tyrannical government).
The media created this whole thing. I remember as a kid watching Phil Donahue in the 70's and 80's talking crazy and my mom and female family members eating it up.
I appreciate how Prof. Pearcey is analysing male history. Albeit I would have wished for sharper distinctions regarding social changes. Depicting what went on during the Industrial Revolution in 5 min. is challenging. Nevertheless I would have pointed out the different societies which emerged at the time. The society of merchants, of farmers, of workers, soldiers, nobility etc. Prof. Pearcey is right to point out the new urban public sphere which became the male domain. Yet she is wrong that only men were drunkards etc. Women staid at home where they were safe and unseen which means the myth of the happy family was their narrative. Where they came to the public eye as landladies or gin-sellers they often were just as much given to bad influence as everybody else. It is obvious that whenever gender is a topic the discussion becomes a confrontational comparison. Pursuing equality in such discussions is very hard to do.
For years I've been saying that people have the idea of 'traditional family roles' all wrong. Both people on the left and right. Men being away from home working while women take care.of the children and home is NOT traditional. Its quite recent.in human history. We evolved to have both male and female parents at home (or for children to.accompanyfathers outside the home). Until roughly WWII, most Americans were farmers, which was a.family business. We have really had less than 100 years where most men have been spending their time away from their families.
When she said (I'm not quoting exactly) if you want better men, produce better fathers," it stuck out to me. True - better men do tend to be better fathers.
Clearly those 19th century criticisms of the changes they were seeing in society had a point, the difference between then and now is what the proposed solution is. Back then they wanted fathers to reconnect with their families and feel that responsibility towards them, that's where they perceived the difference was. Having failed to implement that solution in the last 150 years the proposed solution now is to relegate men to second-class status and put women in charge. However, what is to prevent women from following the same path as men in becoming more secular and disconnected from their families and ending up with the same behavioral problems? Most people probably know or have known promiscuous women, women who drink or use drugs too much, women who engage in criminal behavior (especially in groups). We are already seeing it, just not at the same scale across society as they did 150 years ago.
It started back with the rise of communism, the turn of the twentieth century. “The complete destruction of traditional marriage and the nuclear family is the ‘revolutionary or utopian’ goal of feminism.” - Kate Millett Even better yet, another great feminist of our time, Catharine MacKinnon said, “Feminism, Socialism, Communism are one in the same, and socialist/communist government is the goal of feminism.” - Catharine MacKinnon
Toxic Behaviour "The term is used to define behaviour that is unpleasant or malicious towards others. A person who acts in this way may be suffering from low self-esteem themselves or other mental health conditions. They have experienced childhood trauma in some way, or have deep-rooted personal issues."...notice how that definition does not exclude women.
@@deanpd3402 Really? Are you gaslighting us? Not cool. We all know what society associates with the word Toxic, and it an't "Behaviour" Thanks feminist professors.
@@kc6810no, "toxic masculinity" is a misleading concept. It implies toxic behaviours are particular to men AND an extension of their nature. Either discuss toxicity as a general trait or if we personalise it by gender expression then we discuss BOTH male and female incarnations of toxicity and because we've been rabbiting on about toxic masculinity for a decade it is indeed time to discuss "femininity" unless we detonate "toxic masculinity" as an outmoded silly idea
The thing that burns me up inside is that I am forced to admit that Marx made a couple of very astute observations about the industrial revolution, vaguely similar to what the professor is saying, though they are embedded in an utterly materialist ideological word soup of contempt and resentment.
@@davidback2144 There's no shame in admitting that Marx noticed some things correctly. It's just like the Ubibomer noticed some things correctly. It's just that Marx and the Unibomber had bad solutions. Though I wouldn't say that either were correct about all their observations, just some.
Recognising a problem takes a reasonable person. Presenting solutions requires a smart person. Realising solutions are a series of trade offs and knowing what is best requires wisdom. Smart, reasonable and wise people are in short supply.
Are you aware that the 1st wave of Feminism was the Female arm of the Marxist movement? Even the big lie Feminism is based on, that "women were oppressed by a Patriarchy throughout history" came from Friedrich Engels! @@davidback2144
Responsibility = FatherHood Any Male can Play a Role in “Making” a Baby But Not ALL Males “Qualify to be a Father ! 4 “ P’s” of FatherHood .> Protect .> Provide .> Procreate .> Persevere It takes a Male / Female to “Produce” a Child It takes a Male / Female to “Raise” a Child. Life Begins with Family
Agreed. But there is an added wrinkle in the modern world. Children prevented from having and knowing their Fathers by controlling Mothers. For clarity want to add same responsibilities applies to Mothers and should add Nurture and Educate to the list.
@@42hamneggs And the reason women behave that way now is because of feminism. Feminism has turned women into narcissists. Single-motherhood is a plague on our society.
Stephen-zq2wf, agreed and well said. But marriage is dead and that’s because marriage is only for traditional people and because of feminism women are no longer traditional. Non-traditional people have no business entering into a traditional institution. The result 60% of marriages end in divorce and 80% of marriages are ended by the women.
This was interesting. I discuss the Industrial Revolution with my students in the context on its effect on population movement and the environment (Environmental Science) but it is really fascinating at all the many ways this event impacted society. People don't often realize how vast the ripple effect can be from changes of this kind. That's a real butterfly effect at work.
Also, it is important to adhere that the industrialization of the US economy was never about the advancement of power for all men. It was the advancement of power for a few very powerful men taking that entrepreneurial direction out of the hands of the individual man. Where is everyone back then before the industrialized error was an entrepreneur of sorts the farmer the cobbler, the shoemaker the butcher to a conglomeration of the dominance of monopolies.
It's interesting how many of our societal ills go back to just plain loneliness and lack of connection or just plain unhealthy relationships with family members. "The decline of the family as the fundamental unit of society will bring about the calamities foretold by the prophets of old."--The Family: A Proclamation to the World.
So true. The more I read and learn the more I realize that strong families build strong people. Strong people build strong relationships. Strong relationships build strong societies. Strong societies support strong families. The evidence is overwhelming.
its by design. Politicians want us all isolated and alone because if peeps had a ense of togetherness, we could get rid of the elites and make a better world.
@@johncrow5552 burning down traditional roles, values and structures is what left philosophers explicitly want. they even state that openly in their books. it is nuts.
@@johncrow5552 Ha! It's big business. They want us paired off as married couples, spending money on consumer goods and producing more little consumers.🙂
God’s brilliant design was for the family to function under His direction. Boys and girls desperately need their mothers and fathers love, attention and guidance. A family without a father’s or mother’s wise and loving influence, very easily becomes stunted and dysfunctional.
It is Darwinian without needing religion. Men are an exception to other apes, as they are needed for child rearing. A woman biologist was taking about this.
Fortunately, with social media so prevalent and used by everyone, that toxic masculinity claim is being combated with thousands of examples of toxic femininity, which is just as common, if not more so. Women love nothing more than drama, and video after video demonstrates they can create it out of thin air. I think it’s safe to say at this point, we all have our moments, and conclude humanity is toxic.
That is and was false for the majority of men. The majority of men hated their jobs and longed for their families, which is why so many turned to alcohol and drugs(and to a point still do). But of course it's not the wives of the regular men that wrote the literature, it's the wives of well-off and rich men and some weren't wives at all... Not to mention the people in the universities, where the job is easy and full of snobs... -_-
Exactly! And over the past 50 years we've been pulling women into exactly the same "toxic" trap. It's like Jordan Peterson has pointed out- we're obsessed with why women aren't equally represented in the most high-powered careers, but the more important question is "Why should they *want* to be in those careers when those people are often miserable?". Our post industrial revolution career is, of course, massively productive on material level, but also incredibly destructive on a moral/emotional/spiritual/psychological perspective. We absolutely have to figure out how to balance the pros and cons.
“We” is doing a lot of heavy lifting in your comment. Define the terms you’re using. Without it, it just reads as incoherent babble. And no, “society” isn’t a sufficient definition.
This is very interesting. I think she makes a very good argument that links modern immorality to the industrial revolution. I don’t oppose material development but we need to establish in the popular culture that men being absent, money-obsessed fathers or not having children at all is bad for us. The 9-to-5 isn’t some traditional foundation of Western cultures, it’s a corporate and state mechanism to maximise efficiency and control.
@@anthonymorris5084 Think about how your life is controlled by the clock outside of work too. You wake up by the clock. You eat by the clock. You get the kids ready for school by the clock. You go to work by the clock. You have lunch by the clock. You leave work by the clock. You have dinner by the clock. You do homework with the kids by the clock. You sleep by the clock. You get weekends off. On weekends, you have every minute planned out ahead of time. You go to church by the clock. You go to soccer practice by the clock. You get the car serviced by the clock. You have dinner reservations by the clock. You watch videos by the clock. How many of those times are decided by you? If they're not your decision, then who is in control of your life? It's all very efficient but is it good for you?
In fact, 9 to 5 was created by the early unions, as a rebellion against the earlier "work until you're so tired you start screwing up the product" model. The 40-hour work week was hailed as a huge victory for the working man, compared to the 70-hour workweek common before it.
It’s very interesting that we have not considered how the societal changes that were brought about by the industrial evolution have contributed to the breakdown of the family. Since history today is interpreted through a Marxist lens, the primary focus has been how it contributed to wealth inequalities that government must intervene to address. Ironically, efforts to address the wealth inequalities cut the final tie of father to the family as government replaced him as the provider. If government isn’t anti-family, it certainly does not consider the harm it has done to the family in the name of benevolence.
lol... when asked about the origins of the "toxic" termonology used to refer to men's masculinity... she lays out a history of men "changing into toxic individuals," thus citing "men" as the reason for women adopting the termonology... hahaha 🤣👍 Sounds like a *Femininist!*
“[that time] saw a great rise in drinking, gambling, gang related activity, because men were becoming more secular in their outlook.” It’s a funny way to put it. The simpler and more rational explanation is that the rise of such negative behaviour was caused by the influence of men being taken out of the home by their jobs. It isn’t necessarily anything to do with their secular outlook. I would imagine that the same effect would be observed if they had a religious outlook.
But the rising standards of living in the early modern period which coincides with the Industrial Revolution preceded the rise of romantic love in Western Europe. At least according to a paper released on December 26th "We found that living standards generally predicted and temporally preceded variations of romantic love in the Early Modern Period. Furthermore, romantic love preceded an increase in nuptial rates and a decrease in births per marriage. "
Toxic FORMS of masculinity will never be fulld addressed until people are willing to stand up and admit that a lot of feminimity can be just as equally toxic.
Exactly! The Industrial Revolution, the Enlightenment, and secularism all had a profound impact on society. In a manner of speaking, the very benefits of technological development that ought to be leveraged for the good of society are being squandered. If ever there was an opportunity to return to the solid foundation of the institution of the extended family, the time is now. If we're to find our way back, we're going to need to brush up on our metaphysics and return God to the centre of the public square.... pronto!
Religion wasn’t about keeping God in the public square. It wasn’t about providing communal bonds so that people remained happy, disciplined, and fulfilled with their lives. It’s about having a sense of community and doing the right thing because it’s your job as a human being rather than being fearful of some old man in the sky.
@luke_cohen1 Agreed, however, the impact (not purpose) you refer to is secondary relative to the legitimate role of government in the context of Western civilisation. The PURPOSE is to keep the institution of government and all it's branches, morally and legally informed. To ensure that legitimacy of law prevails. There is a final separation between Church and state that ought to lead to concordia, not rupture and disassociation. The Christian state is neither theocratic nor secular. Church first, state second.
For every negative thing you say about someone, you must say one positive thing and point out the counter arguments negatives as well. "I dont like feminism because they stigmatize men, but i reapect the fact that they stand up for womens rights and i genuinely dont like how men are forced a certain masculinity upon them"
Francis Schaffer made the point that the Church dropped the ball during the Industrial Revolution. Had Christian Institutions and leaders addressed the problems that arose for the family as a result of industrialization, perhaps we would not be where we are, today.
Toxic masculinity and toxic femininity don't exist. The behaviors we try to describe are psychopathy and narcissism. The are not the extreme versions of the masculine and feminine. If you take masculinity and feminity to its extremes you get soldiers defending and fighting to the death to give someone else a chance at life, or nurses taking care of ebola patients. The prefix toxic- is an insult to both masculine and feminine.
There is no such thing like toxic masculinity. Certainly there is a long tradition of misandry, but today, this phrase is used to denigrate masculinity itself whenever it is deemed convenient or favorable.
Was expecting a quotation (citing the author) where the term _Toxic Masculinity_ can be seen used for the first time! What she says is true, but very well-known, too (at least among well-read folks); I learnt nothing new from this video.
@@wyleecoyotee4252 A study showed countries run by women were 27% more likely to be involved in wars and if you have ever worked with whamen, you know thats true.
briiliant! I have heard such language used to xplain the why some of the blacks get into gangs and drugs. but it makes sense that the same factors could corrupt the whole society, not just the poor black corner of it!
@@wyleecoyotee4252 History would say otherwise. If men had not supported their women throughout history, then there would be no human race left today. Do you really think a stone-age woman who just gave birth had the ability to keep herself and her child alive without the support of a man? Only a relatively small minority of men have ever NOT cared about raising their children.
A very intriguing look into the root cause of what separated men from their values which in turn formed a new undertaking for men to take upon themselves. It shows that the loss of core values to sustain men to a more grounded moral duty, causes decay in their persona and overall lifestyle. Interesting
Once you define "good", you realize and accept where that standard comes from and everything falls into place. Tell me, if your position is true, what does society do with those that are "not a Good person" ?
Typical. She has a decent message, but makes up some nonsense in order to stand out as someone who has miraculously discovered something that the entire academy of Europe and America missed.
I don't agree with women over children. My ex was just some women I met and fell in love with. My children are my blood and love me more than any person I meet in the world. Thank God I was awarded custody and was there for them and raised them while their mother was out carrying on with her boyfriend.
This is an attempt at blaming men. Drinking and gambling were most certainly NOT more prevalent in the early 1900s vs 1800s. And agter all of these changes, what was the abortion rate? Rate of single motherhood? Thought so. FEMINISM IS WHAT SKYROCKETED THOSE THINGS. Not made up toxic masculinity.
This could happen if we go back to more localised/communal production. The globalisation of industries looks to have run its course. Or accelerate mechanisation of jobs so more and more ppl can enjoy life with their family and be released from the soul crushing mundane existence of 9-5 work, rid the world of the competitive nature of capitalism and the ridiculous idea we need competition to innovate (human needs drive innovation), get rid of money that just corrupts/creates obscene wealth at the top and move toward a resource based economy, freeing humans to live in closer knit family units...focusing on the health and wellbeing of humans and the planet over consumption and infinite growth and the accumulation of individual wealth. Read Peter Joseph's book The New Human Rights Movement.
“Competition” does drive innovation. Everyone who can get ahold of what information is out there and they’re all working to solve problems. Someone does usually get to the answer first and they are rewarded for it. It’s an incentive structure. Yes, solutions are born from need but motivation is often an accelerant and some solutions would not come about without that kind of motivation. It’s definitely not a ridiculous idea.
I can't help but notice that "toxic femininity" is rarely discussed in media. Blame is assigned even when men are forced by circumstance to adhere to economic changes.
its all over youtube
There is a big study across cultures that shows than men and women, both, show positive prejudice against unknown women and negative prejudice against unknown men. If you combine that with he simple 'victim' and 'oppressor' narrative nowadays, you end up at general hatred against men.
@@BenRobinson1974 Really? All over youtube.....let's do an experiement shall we? Open youtube, type "Toxic F" into the search bar......of the first 14 replies how many are about toxic femininity" ? Mine shows, zero
That's because it doesn't exist.
"Toxic femininity" was made in direct response to "toxic masculinity".
There is nothing toxic about femininity and there is nothing toxic about masculinity.
@@BenRobinson1974 In other words since 15 years and limited to some spaces, as opposed to 150 years mainstream manbashing.
In 2024 misogyny is pure evil and must be eradicated but misandry is promoted, encouraged, and celebrated.
Very similar to current views on racism (ie only white people can be racist).
Don't fool yourself - some of those promoting misogyny are feminists. They're pure misanthropes.
That’s outcome of toxic modern feminism.
Then they deny that misandry even exists.
The Bigest Misogyny is in the Asia Now.
Absolutely brillant, father son relationship needs to be redeemed...
This was very interesting, about how one of the aspects of the Industrial Revolution changed our lives. Pre IR was a time we cannot imagine now when a community and farming and the family were paramount and of course your Church. This lady talks about re-connecting but the sexes are farther apart than ever. Some aspects of the feminist movements are spiteful to men and we have seen the rise of MGTOW and studies show men are more likely to come out worst in divorce, be homeless ,suffer depression and be made redundant in employment.
They celebrate Hedonism now
As a man who rails against man bashing which appears to have begun with Archie Bunker it is refreshing to see a woman who can stand back and comment on what was probably the greater sociological change in the last 1000 years, which was the industrial revolution which took men out of their household and made the mentorship of young men more of a chance encounter than it had ever been in history.
Actually, that is somewhat a flawed argument, what the lady said was that “fathers” increasingly became less involved in the mentorship of their own children as they took more industrial jobs in the ninetieth century thus eroding their connection to “their” family.
That doesn’t address the increase of apprenticeships that also resulted from that technological change, mentorship of young men did happen it just happened from someone other than your father.
I wonder what impact that might have had either positively or negatively on young men.
@@forgivemenot1 I suppose mentorship from one's father is sth totally different than from an institution
This was fascinating. It really shows that losing religious and family values, mucks everything up at a truly foundational level...
What she said is that values are formed by roles, not the other way around.
@@itsnotatoober The roles that existed back in the nineteen hundreds did not solely form the values by which people lived, and she never made that claim.
She said that by men moving out of the family centric workspace during the industrial revolution, the already established values that were nurtured in such an environment, were eroded away.
Almost all traditional societal underpinnings and value systems, regardless of culture, are centred on religion. That much isn't really disputed, even by atheist scholars and historians.
Mucks everything up 😂😂 I guess you'd rather live in the 18th century then, the best century as everyone calls it! Infant mortality to the roof, life expectancy of 35 🎉🎉
@@puzzardosalami3443 What are you babbling about?
@@joshflorence1998 I'm babbling about the amazing 17th century of which you know nothing about.
Toxic masculinity isn't so toxic when a woman gets a flat tire and she doesn't want to get her dress dirty replacing it. It amuses me that so many women decry "toxic masculinity" but want heroines in the movies and TV who do all the things they supposedly don't want men to do.
This is amazing, she articulates what I had thought about the industrial revolution and it's effects, not only did it take men out of the home, but they lost their lore.
I wonder if that's at least partially true because while on the farm or working in around the home, wives / families to could see the hours & exersion men put in each & every day. Once they left in the morning for "work" only to return home at night the dangers & level of physical work was no longer understood.Thus they began to be taken for granted.
Pushy, highly educated women.. How attractive
@@kc6810 touch a nerve did we? how badly does your indoctrinated misandry need to flip anything back to "all women oppressed, all men oppressors"?
You know it is allowed to give men some credit, that doesn't mean it's being taken away from women.
@@mikeabbasi4551
Sadly I’m a pushy and educated woman ha .. but I love the notion of the autonomous home built together by a father and mother..
That’s joy!❤
@@kc6810a lot of people died of everything. Historically men died more than women and that is true now but was even more true those days. So stop plating the victim, you always like yo thing that are the only ones that siufer that or the other, even now.
John Anderson is classy. He never interrupts when his guest is speaking.
A dying art form indeed.
Yes, he's not a leftist.
@@alanjm1234 I don’t know why people call them leftists because they’re not leftists they are Communists.
Well, he doesn't need to interrupt here, because the speaking lady articulates well and doesn't go off tangents.
I was raised very atheistic, despite having a long history of activist religious relatives such as Roger Williams of Rhode Island. Now in my early 50s, after raising 2 kids and being married to far more traditional and spiritual Christian wife I see the clear connection between secular values and Judeo Christian values. The sense of right and wrong that so many young liberals think sprang from their own minds and hearts simply because they’re good people actually came from religious morality. Through this realization and in this manner I’ve gotten much closer to God, and for the better!
I still don't believe in God, like... at all, but just because a person in history was a religious person, doesn't mean they were dumb or didn't think thoroughly through things.
Which obviously means that they might have had a good idea and then it would be silly to ignore said good idea.
Doesn't mean one should take everything at face value of course.
The explanation of men being towed from the family to the workplace was just incredible.
Sailors and Merchants have existed since time began. Try Again.
Spanish here. Still in Spain people identify themselves with the family and the people they surround themselves with, not with a particular job or company, which are such attitudes we used to see in Anglo movies. Later in my career I noticed that the phenomenon is widespread in North Europe and Central Europe, people identity is built around a job, which for us seems quite absurd, because it is just one part of life and we do not give much shet about what a friend or family member does for a living as long as his/her persona is a match with ours. In summary you can say that it doesn’t matter to our society if you make six figures and run a bank if you’re completely detached from family and friends. You’re a homeless person with money, at best.
Unfortunately much of the Anglo-Saxon way of prioritising individual achievements through work is coming more commonplace, but with a twist.
I do find it quite amusing when people talk about how their lives revolve around their careers, but also that it is not appropriate to look for or find romance/love in the workplace. Then they wonder why they cannot find a dating partner, let alone someone to start a family with.
Interesting perspective, thanks. "a homeless person with money" is a good meme
And that's even worse, people don't even get to marry or have a relationship.
Btw, I am mexican, we have similar culture but I think that in big cities is like in the usa, not as much but also revolving around the job. And it's interesting how Mexicans that go to the usa feel so empty, they say that people live to work, specially because they have their cities built around living very far from their jobs. But there is a phenomenon that many Americans re coming to Mexico to live, and the say that the primary reason is that they feel more like in a family and community... En in Mexico city that is a monster and difficult to live because traffic. In other places the family interaction is even more. How awful is to live like that
.. for what? To be despressed all day all your life?
@@codniggh1139 very good insight. I guess it is the price to pay for competing on a global market?. Un saludo
4:57 "we're not going to get a better class of men until we get a better class of fathers" - we're not going to get a better class of men until men CAN be fathers, and women stop aspiring to be single mothers.
Blame men if you want, when they've paid a fortune in legal fees to get custody - but failed, or haven't even been told that they are fathers.
Anything to keep blaming men mate. They will literally grasp as anything to keep blaming men. It's always the mans fault, no matter what. Especially if you're a white man, then you are literally the devil incarnate, even though white men literally built the modern world over the last 150 years, and created the overwhelming amount of scientific discovery over the last 2000 years, we're still the worst thing to have ever existed.
When we're men ever fathers?
Historically men had little to do with their children
@@wyleecoyotee4252 Historically men got child custody up until the mid 19th century. The tender years doctrine was passed quite literally to change that.
You're just not even trying. You're not even making an effort. Such confident ignorance.
Like a female. Eugh.
@@wyleecoyotee4252 I would recommend that you watch "the surprising origins of toxic masculinity" from 0:58 - books about raising children were addressed to men, because it was their responsibility. Men have had lots to do with raising their children, and when given chance, they still do.
@@wyleecoyotee4252 if men were never fathers, why would the word "farther" exist? Women used to take of kids when young, say 6 years, then the boys were given to the fathers to be turned into men. Maybe you missed this and were turned into a soyboy by your mother.
Whatever the cause she still manages to conclude that it is 'men misbehaving" To me it sounds like men were losing those very few choices they had and acting out of frustration. A process still going on today.
She pointed out that the toxic masculinity mindset was the original appearance of men misbehaving.
She isn’t placing blame but pointing out facts of the cause and effect from taking men away from their homes
@@c.galindo9639
But she is though.
The >actual< cause of all this supposed “male misbehavior” was the government removing male authority over his family.
This was done indirectly via things like destruction of currency (the central banks, taxes etc…) and directly via destruction of work opportunities (the great depression, world wars…) all of which occurred in roughly the same period.
Claiming that men started collectively “acting up” out of the blue just because work moved to factories is no different that the logic of the people she’s citing.
So now you are trying to make the tragedy of men into something that's about women? Typical Female behaviour. Kind of toxic, too.@@kc6810
"We're not going to get a better class of man until we get a better class of woman." Why not run that headline?
Because holding women accountable is still a no no.
They figure there's a vague possibility of getting better fathers, because men might actually try. There's basically NO possibility of getting women to be better people, so not worth discussing.
@@johncrow5552 I feel we aren't going to get a better class of woman or men tell both are held accountable on an individual(rather then collective) level, the left hasn't been holding woman accountable(even encouraging woman to act like the worst stereotypes ever made about both woman and feminists) and aren't exactly committed to holding men accountable either(there support for Islamic fundamentalists shows this truth). Actually nearly everything that can make men toxic is being encouraged in the modern day( with the encouraging of criminal behaviour, demonization of men, pushing fathers out of the home and propping up of Islamic fundamentalists clearly making boy to gangster and boy to Islamic extremist pipelines) and then many people go surprise pickacu face when nearly every fear people on the right have starts coming true.
because it is childish, it is basically keeping the fire of blame and division going , instead of realising that both men and women have failed
it is the equivalent of saying . ''I wont apologise until they do'' , crossing your arms and pouting
Completely disagree. Passing the buck not a solution. Men need to step up and not fall for the FAUX Cultural Marxist BS & "Man up" --
Who's going to defend your family? 5'2" 100lb woman or 6'2" 200lb man? Can't argue with Human Nature & Laws of Nature.
Prior to the Industrial Age, a Man only knew the ONE skill they were taught by their Fathers. If there was no need for that skill, their Families would starve. The Industrial Age forced Men to learn other skills, ones they would never have been exposed to or ever considered because of the Cast of Hereditary based on skills. Coopers, Millers, Weavers, Wrights, Smiths, etc.. Family names were based on what one did to earn a living. We lost things during the transition but we also gained things as well. New skills, knowledge, life experiences, new points of view, new cultures, new worlds, etc.. We simply forgot to reset our course and check our sails on the journey.
Absolutely laughable take. You think that prior to the Industrial revolution people didn't have to run their homesteads in addition to whatever they did to participate in the broader economy? That Mr. Smith didn't have a garden that he could grow food in? Couldn't hunt or fish? Just looked at his torn shirt hopelessly?
@@mylesleggette7520 In total agreement.
Knowing that Feminism began in around the 1850s with the stated goal of breaking the family structure, this is not surprising to me in the least.
This is also around the same time that the term "The Patriarchy" began.
"The Patriarchy" merely being a term that refers to "Father lead homes and families".
ie, the Patriarch.
Feminism began with the stated aim of breaking the family structure? You’re going to have to explain that a bit better. Sources, motives, context etc.
@@thecuttingsark5094 What is a Patriarch?
@@iambob6590 the male head of a family
@@thecuttingsark5094 Which would mean that "The Patriarchy" is what?
For info on the timeline.
One example is the Seneca Falls meeting, and "The Declaration of Sentiments.
While this makes many valid and obvious points it misses a couple important ones.
Men have increasingly had their “reason for existence” … their “role” … stripped away.
Pre Industrial age a man brought to his family physical items made or “earned” by his own hands oftentimes the entire family was involved in working for their survival and all earned respect for doing their part.
Today, the man’s importance is often undermined or lessened by the woman working as well in completely unrelated jobs.
Men are often relegated to “bringing home a check” in effect becoming a rent paying tenant in their own home, family, life.
The family spends the income without any understanding or care as to its source or what was required to make that income.
I feel like people in my home area avoid that harmful mindset(of treating the mans role as little more then a paying tenet) but rural parts of Canada are different then say, highly Urban areas that consistently vote left-win. The culture that is promoted in an area will set the tone for said area, with what is promoted by the people who live in said area having the strongest effect on the over all culture and tone. Individuals and societies get what they sow and nurture, often with innocent people suffering form the mistakes and wrong doings of authority figures(this becomes especially obvious when you look into say the effects of poor parenting, teachers abusing there position and irresponsible/tyrannical government).
Her book goes into this so much in depth. Highly recommend
The media created this whole thing. I remember as a kid watching Phil Donahue in the 70's and 80's talking crazy and my mom and female family members eating it up.
Men’s ability to be a father is held hostage by the disgruntled woman for her wants. How she can sacrifice her child is disturbing and malicious
We live in a Feminist society that is led by women. Why is it a problem if we try to make women accountable for what they do to society?@@kc6810
I appreciate how Prof. Pearcey is analysing male history. Albeit I would have wished for sharper distinctions regarding social changes. Depicting what went on during the Industrial Revolution in 5 min. is challenging. Nevertheless I would have pointed out the different societies which emerged at the time. The society of merchants, of farmers, of workers, soldiers, nobility etc. Prof. Pearcey is right to point out the new urban public sphere which became the male domain. Yet she is wrong that only men were drunkards etc. Women staid at home where they were safe and unseen which means the myth of the happy family was their narrative. Where they came to the public eye as landladies or gin-sellers they often were just as much given to bad influence as everybody else. It is obvious that whenever gender is a topic the discussion becomes a confrontational comparison. Pursuing equality in such discussions is very hard to do.
seems they've done more to push men further away from family than to reconnect them to it.
For years I've been saying that people have the idea of 'traditional family roles' all wrong. Both people on the left and right. Men being away from home working while women take care.of the children and home is NOT traditional. Its quite recent.in human history. We evolved to have both male and female parents at home (or for children to.accompanyfathers outside the home). Until roughly WWII, most Americans were farmers, which was a.family business. We have really had less than 100 years where most men have been spending their time away from their families.
Formal Schooling of the Masses has done great harm.
When she said (I'm not quoting exactly) if you want better men, produce better fathers," it stuck out to me. True - better men do tend to be better fathers.
And better men tend to have had better fathers.
They probably tend to have better mothers too. @@johnsposato5632
Clearly those 19th century criticisms of the changes they were seeing in society had a point, the difference between then and now is what the proposed solution is. Back then they wanted fathers to reconnect with their families and feel that responsibility towards them, that's where they perceived the difference was. Having failed to implement that solution in the last 150 years the proposed solution now is to relegate men to second-class status and put women in charge. However, what is to prevent women from following the same path as men in becoming more secular and disconnected from their families and ending up with the same behavioral problems? Most people probably know or have known promiscuous women, women who drink or use drugs too much, women who engage in criminal behavior (especially in groups). We are already seeing it, just not at the same scale across society as they did 150 years ago.
It started back with the rise of communism, the turn of the twentieth century.
“The complete destruction of traditional marriage and the nuclear family is the ‘revolutionary or utopian’ goal of feminism.” - Kate Millett
Even better yet, another great feminist of our time, Catharine MacKinnon said,
“Feminism, Socialism, Communism are one in the same, and socialist/communist government is the goal of feminism.” - Catharine MacKinnon
Never take social criticism from a demographic that has never once built so much as a single village or paved a road in the entire history of mankind.
Can we talk about toxic femininity please?
It'll take all day.
Toxic Behaviour "The term is used to define behaviour that is unpleasant or malicious towards others. A person who acts in this way may be suffering from low self-esteem themselves or other mental health conditions. They have experienced childhood trauma in some way, or have deep-rooted personal issues."...notice how that definition does not exclude women.
@@deanpd3402 Really? Are you gaslighting us? Not cool. We all know what society associates with the word Toxic, and it an't "Behaviour" Thanks feminist professors.
@@kc6810no, "toxic masculinity" is a misleading concept.
It implies toxic behaviours are particular to men AND an extension of their nature.
Either discuss toxicity as a general trait or if we personalise it by gender expression then we discuss BOTH male and female incarnations of toxicity and because we've been rabbiting on about toxic masculinity for a decade it is indeed time to discuss "femininity" unless we detonate "toxic masculinity" as an outmoded silly idea
Oh, "we" ain't ready for that discussion yet.
Really interesting, but not really surprising. The Industrial Revolution was the start of a lot of problems we're currently dealing with.
The thing that burns me up inside is that I am forced to admit that Marx made a couple of very astute observations about the industrial revolution, vaguely similar to what the professor is saying, though they are embedded in an utterly materialist ideological word soup of contempt and resentment.
@@davidback2144 There's no shame in admitting that Marx noticed some things correctly. It's just like the Ubibomer noticed some things correctly. It's just that Marx and the Unibomber had bad solutions. Though I wouldn't say that either were correct about all their observations, just some.
Recognising a problem takes a reasonable person. Presenting solutions requires a smart person. Realising solutions are a series of trade offs and knowing what is best requires wisdom. Smart, reasonable and wise people are in short supply.
Are you aware that the 1st wave of Feminism was the Female arm of the Marxist movement? Even the big lie Feminism is based on, that "women were oppressed by a Patriarchy throughout history" came from Friedrich Engels! @@davidback2144
This is kind of jaw dropping... it needs to be discussed more.
There's no such thing as toxic masculinity.
People are toxic! Individual by individual, not by gender.
@@MHus-bv3kx ...Exactly. 💯
@@MHus-bv3kx I would go further than that. People act in toxic ways, people themselves are not inherently toxic just because they act poorly.
Responsibility = FatherHood
Any Male can Play a Role in “Making” a Baby
But Not ALL Males “Qualify to be a Father !
4 “ P’s” of FatherHood
.> Protect
.> Provide
.> Procreate
.> Persevere
It takes a Male / Female to “Produce” a Child
It takes a Male / Female to “Raise” a Child.
Life Begins with Family
@Stephen-zq2wf yet, the majority of divorces are initiated by women.
Agreed. But there is an added wrinkle in the modern world. Children prevented from having and knowing their Fathers by controlling Mothers.
For clarity want to add same responsibilities applies to Mothers and should add Nurture and Educate to the list.
@@42hamneggs And the reason women behave that way now is because of feminism. Feminism has turned women into narcissists. Single-motherhood is a plague on our society.
Stephen-zq2wf, agreed and well said. But marriage is dead and that’s because marriage is only for traditional people and because of feminism women are no longer traditional. Non-traditional people have no business entering into a traditional institution. The result 60% of marriages end in divorce and 80% of marriages are ended by the women.
@@stevemahoney1733
Most are FILED by women, not all of them are initiated by women
This was interesting. I discuss the Industrial Revolution with my students in the context on its effect on population movement and the environment (Environmental Science) but it is really fascinating at all the many ways this event impacted society. People don't often realize how vast the ripple effect can be from changes of this kind. That's a real butterfly effect at work.
I love that this historical perspective is being presented.
Toxic masculinity? How about insidious femininity, let’s talk about that!
Very insightful. Usually these kinds of things are reinforcing the obvious. But this makes sense.
Fascinating.
I didn't know any of this.
Also, it is important to adhere that the industrialization of the US economy was never about the advancement of power for all men. It was the advancement of power for a few very powerful men taking that entrepreneurial direction out of the hands of the individual man. Where is everyone back then before the industrialized error was an entrepreneur of sorts the farmer the cobbler, the shoemaker the butcher to a conglomeration of the dominance of monopolies.
John. The Nationals need you. You are the remnant of the great values that have withered without your guiding hand
It's interesting how many of our societal ills go back to just plain loneliness and lack of connection or just plain unhealthy relationships with family members. "The decline of the family as the fundamental unit of society will bring about the calamities foretold by the prophets of old."--The Family: A Proclamation to the World.
So true. The more I read and learn the more I realize that strong families build strong people. Strong people build strong relationships. Strong relationships build strong societies. Strong societies support strong families. The evidence is overwhelming.
its by design. Politicians want us all isolated and alone because if peeps had a ense of togetherness, we could get rid of the elites and make a better world.
@@johncrow5552 burning down traditional roles, values and structures is what left philosophers explicitly want. they even state that openly in their books. it is nuts.
@@johncrow5552 Ha! It's big business. They want us paired off as married couples, spending money on consumer goods and producing more little consumers.🙂
Fascinating perspective, and makes an enormous amount of sense! Thank you very much for this new puzzle piece.
God’s brilliant design was for the family to function under His direction.
Boys and girls desperately need their mothers and fathers love, attention and guidance.
A family without a father’s or mother’s wise and loving influence, very easily becomes stunted and dysfunctional.
It is Darwinian without needing religion. Men are an exception to other apes, as they are needed for child rearing. A woman biologist was taking about this.
@@kentl7228 Created in the image of God - Male XY and Female XX.
@@noweternity3101 no arguments about xx and xy. Modern gender nonsense is unscientific.
@@kc6810 Evolution wasn't privvy to the future invention of diapers. Also, I did that stuff.
Talk talk your self into whatever you desire
Goodness. Excellent content.
Fortunately, with social media so prevalent and used by everyone, that toxic masculinity claim is being combated with thousands of examples of toxic femininity, which is just as common, if not more so. Women love nothing more than drama, and video after video demonstrates they can create it out of thin air. I think it’s safe to say at this point, we all have our moments, and conclude humanity is toxic.
That is and was false for the majority of men. The majority of men hated their jobs and longed for their families, which is why so many turned to alcohol and drugs(and to a point still do).
But of course it's not the wives of the regular men that wrote the literature, it's the wives of well-off and rich men and some weren't wives at all... Not to mention the people in the universities, where the job is easy and full of snobs... -_-
Any excuse to hold men universally accountable for quite literally everything that ever happens in society.
@@paccawacca4069 It's called misandry.
Exactly! And over the past 50 years we've been pulling women into exactly the same "toxic" trap. It's like Jordan Peterson has pointed out- we're obsessed with why women aren't equally represented in the most high-powered careers, but the more important question is "Why should they *want* to be in those careers when those people are often miserable?". Our post industrial revolution career is, of course, massively productive on material level, but also incredibly destructive on a moral/emotional/spiritual/psychological perspective. We absolutely have to figure out how to balance the pros and cons.
“We” is doing a lot of heavy lifting in your comment. Define the terms you’re using. Without it, it just reads as incoherent babble. And no, “society” isn’t a sufficient definition.
This is very interesting. I think she makes a very good argument that links modern immorality to the industrial revolution. I don’t oppose material development but we need to establish in the popular culture that men being absent, money-obsessed fathers or not having children at all is bad for us. The 9-to-5 isn’t some traditional foundation of Western cultures, it’s a corporate and state mechanism to maximise efficiency and control.
And 9 to 5 is just the baseline. The boss always want A LOT more.
9 - 5 is just a pragmatic development. It may indeed maximize efficiency, but I see no evidence it was created for "control".
@@anthonymorris5084 Think about how your life is controlled by the clock outside of work too. You wake up by the clock. You eat by the clock. You get the kids ready for school by the clock. You go to work by the clock. You have lunch by the clock. You leave work by the clock. You have dinner by the clock. You do homework with the kids by the clock. You sleep by the clock. You get weekends off. On weekends, you have every minute planned out ahead of time. You go to church by the clock. You go to soccer practice by the clock. You get the car serviced by the clock. You have dinner reservations by the clock. You watch videos by the clock. How many of those times are decided by you? If they're not your decision, then who is in control of your life? It's all very efficient but is it good for you?
In fact, 9 to 5 was created by the early unions, as a rebellion against the earlier "work until you're so tired you start screwing up the product" model.
The 40-hour work week was hailed as a huge victory for the working man, compared to the 70-hour workweek common before it.
Sharing this with everyone
Wow some surprising historical info here ... fascinating
It’s very interesting that we have not considered how the societal changes that were brought about by the industrial evolution have contributed to the breakdown of the family. Since history today is interpreted through a Marxist lens, the primary focus has been how it contributed to wealth inequalities that government must intervene to address. Ironically, efforts to address the wealth inequalities cut the final tie of father to the family as government replaced him as the provider. If government isn’t anti-family, it certainly does not consider the harm it has done to the family in the name of benevolence.
lol... when asked about the origins of the "toxic" termonology used to refer to men's masculinity... she lays out a history of men "changing into toxic individuals," thus citing "men" as the reason for women adopting the termonology... hahaha 🤣👍
Sounds like a *Femininist!*
“[that time] saw a great rise in drinking, gambling, gang related activity, because men were becoming more secular in their outlook.”
It’s a funny way to put it. The simpler and more rational explanation is that the rise of such negative behaviour was caused by the influence of men being taken out of the home by their jobs. It isn’t necessarily anything to do with their secular outlook. I would imagine that the same effect would be observed if they had a religious outlook.
Truly fascinating
But the rising standards of living in the early modern period which coincides with the Industrial Revolution preceded the rise of romantic love in Western Europe. At least according to a paper released on December 26th
"We found that living standards generally predicted and temporally preceded variations of romantic love in the Early Modern Period. Furthermore, romantic love preceded an increase in nuptial rates and a decrease in births per marriage. "
Link To study please? Sounds like a good read.
Toxic FORMS of masculinity will never be fulld addressed until people are willing to stand up and admit that a lot of feminimity can be just as equally toxic.
Fascinating! Thank you! G Ire re
Seeing the same behavior change in women too
Exactly! The Industrial Revolution, the Enlightenment, and secularism all had a profound impact on society. In a manner of speaking, the very benefits of technological development that ought to be leveraged for the good of society are being squandered. If ever there was an opportunity to return to the solid foundation of the institution of the extended family, the time is now. If we're to find our way back, we're going to need to brush up on our metaphysics and return God to the centre of the public square.... pronto!
😮 Of course RELIGION and endless WAR.😅
@ianmangham4570 just like Mohammadism.
@@tjrrind1452 Ya mean islamists
Religion wasn’t about keeping God in the public square. It wasn’t about providing communal bonds so that people remained happy, disciplined, and fulfilled with their lives. It’s about having a sense of community and doing the right thing because it’s your job as a human being rather than being fearful of some old man in the sky.
@luke_cohen1 Agreed, however, the impact (not purpose) you refer to is secondary relative to the legitimate role of government in the context of Western civilisation. The PURPOSE is to keep the institution of government and all it's branches, morally and legally informed. To ensure that legitimacy of law prevails. There is a final separation between Church and state that ought to lead to concordia, not rupture and disassociation. The Christian state is neither theocratic nor secular. Church first, state second.
For every negative thing you say about someone, you must say one positive thing and point out the counter arguments negatives as well.
"I dont like feminism because they stigmatize men, but i reapect the fact that they stand up for womens rights and i genuinely dont like how men are forced a certain masculinity upon them"
Francis Schaffer made the point that the Church dropped the ball during the Industrial Revolution. Had Christian Institutions and leaders addressed the problems that arose for the family as a result of industrialization, perhaps we would not be where we are, today.
Toxic masculinity and toxic femininity don't exist. The behaviors we try to describe are psychopathy and narcissism. The are not the extreme versions of the masculine and feminine. If you take masculinity and feminity to its extremes you get soldiers defending and fighting to the death to give someone else a chance at life, or nurses taking care of ebola patients. The prefix toxic- is an insult to both masculine and feminine.
For this reason I hope the work-from-home trend continues.
There is no such thing like toxic masculinity. Certainly there is a long tradition of misandry, but today, this phrase is used to denigrate masculinity itself whenever it is deemed convenient or favorable.
Was expecting a quotation (citing the author) where the term _Toxic Masculinity_ can be seen used for the first time! What she says is true, but very well-known, too (at least among well-read folks); I learnt nothing new from this video.
O melhor pensamento, resume bem a queda da familia e da sociedade. queria mesmo saber onde foi que tudo comecou....
Let's not forget what all the wars did to masculinity, and the role of men. The death and ruination of millions of men.
Don't forget that it's men who started those wars
@@wyleecoyotee4252, No, not men, Monsters started those wars.
@@jimig6442
Lame attempt to deflect.
It's men who cause wars.
@@wyleecoyotee4252 A study showed countries run by women were 27% more likely to be involved in wars and if you have ever worked with whamen, you know thats true.
the damage has been done.
briiliant! I have heard such language used to xplain the why some of the blacks get into gangs and drugs. but it makes sense that the same factors could corrupt the whole society, not just the poor black corner of it!
@2:35 interesting how this is the version of "conservative values" that most in the red pill space appeal to.
Why skip how to connect men back to their churches? Why ignore perhaps the most important influence?
And it was these toxic women who separated the men from their kids in the first place…..
That's a fallacy.
Most men only care they have progeny and prefer little to no involvement with them
@@wyleecoyotee4252 History would say otherwise. If men had not supported their women throughout history, then there would be no human race left today. Do you really think a stone-age woman who just gave birth had the ability to keep herself and her child alive without the support of a man? Only a relatively small minority of men have ever NOT cared about raising their children.
@@wyleecoyotee4252 That's the second comment I've seen you make propegating such ridiculous statements. Obviously you didn't even watch the video.
@@kc6810 but it's not entirely contradictory to the video at least.
We should stop talking about masculinity and start talking about manliness.
Steve Martin with a British accent?
Anybody notice this lady jumping in her conversation, speak one fact then halfway jump to another and not verify any of it.
Profound!!!!!
Good era to start football 🏈 not that football ⚽
Don't tell this in Ireland !
Yep, 1800's toxic panic
Better fathers, Better husbands...Bring back Christian religious studies into grade schools/junior school. 🇦🇺
We really need better women.
Single motherhood is a female caused problem.
christian religion does not create better fathers. or better husbands.
@@matswessling6600 yes it does.
Although as I stands, we need better mothers and wives. Fathers and husbands aren't the issue. Women are
@@paccawacca4069 LOL. you really have no clue...
@@matswessling6600 single motherhood is woman caused.
The more I learn about history and religion, the more I begin to suspect the mormons are right 💀
The morons are never right
Renowned third generation feminist
Mandie Turkeybaster-Ballzoff
...if memory serves...🤣
Ha. Ridiculous. Saying dumb stuff is way too common. Start there
A very intriguing look into the root cause of what separated men from their values which in turn formed a new undertaking for men to take upon themselves.
It shows that the loss of core values to sustain men to a more grounded moral duty, causes decay in their persona and overall lifestyle.
Interesting
bye bye family altogether now.
Misandry. That’s what you call it.
If you need a God to be Good then you are not a Good person
Once you define "good", you realize and accept where that standard comes from and everything falls into place. Tell me, if your position is true, what does society do with those that are "not a Good person" ?
Where did people learn to not be good? Because they weren’t born that way.
So who determines what is good? It seems in your lofty mind that you do. You are part of the problem.
That's sounds quite Christopher Hitchens and others to me. Surely religion is an influence on (tribal/national) culture, household to household...
@@shaneashby5890 As someone is stealing your car (or worse) I doubt you'll ask yourself 'where did they learn to "not be good".
This is some interesting food for though, I'll say.
Islam is right about women.
This video was a lot of gas lighting !!!!
Typical. She has a decent message, but makes up some nonsense in order to stand out as someone who has miraculously discovered something that the entire academy of Europe and America missed.
or looks away from
@@martijnb5887 Have a look around America, and people writing books, one sort or another.
Bs leftist drivel.....😅
How was this in any way Leftist?
@@IHateThisHandleSystem Feminism has been hijacked by the militant lesbian left....
Prior to the industrial revolution men were off conducting war and conquest.
No. Prior to the industrial revolution men were farming. Fukin dumbas
You forgot to add forced against their will.
@@paccawacca4069 Reported.
Hmm, no. A few were, most were not. It's like saying "today men are leading corporations ".
It's men who started those wars
You need Jesus, I can't eat that
Toxic masculinity built the word, civilization and unclogs toilets.
It's easy to unclog a toilet
Men should put God first, then father and son. GOD over Jesus Christ Jesus Christ over man. man over women. women over children.
I don't agree with women over children. My ex was just some women I met and fell in love with. My children are my blood and love me more than any person I meet in the world. Thank God I was awarded custody and was there for them and raised them while their mother was out carrying on with her boyfriend.
God doesn't even exist
This is an attempt at blaming men. Drinking and gambling were most certainly NOT more prevalent in the early 1900s vs 1800s. And agter all of these changes, what was the abortion rate? Rate of single motherhood? Thought so. FEMINISM IS WHAT SKYROCKETED THOSE THINGS. Not made up toxic masculinity.
This could happen if we go back to more localised/communal production. The globalisation of industries looks to have run its course. Or accelerate mechanisation of jobs so more and more ppl can enjoy life with their family and be released from the soul crushing mundane existence of 9-5 work, rid the world of the competitive nature of capitalism and the ridiculous idea we need competition to innovate (human needs drive innovation), get rid of money that just corrupts/creates obscene wealth at the top and move toward a resource based economy, freeing humans to live in closer knit family units...focusing on the health and wellbeing of humans and the planet over consumption and infinite growth and the accumulation of individual wealth. Read Peter Joseph's book The New Human Rights Movement.
“Competition” does drive innovation. Everyone who can get ahold of what information is out there and they’re all working to solve problems. Someone does usually get to the answer first and they are rewarded for it. It’s an incentive structure. Yes, solutions are born from need but motivation is often an accelerant and some solutions would not come about without that kind of motivation. It’s definitely not a ridiculous idea.