An Empathetic Note On “Men Not Being Able To Express Their Feelings”

I understand that this has more to do with individual traits maturity rather than gender (which is why I’ll never be an MRA), but for some reason identity politics like Feminism seem to misconstrue the phenomenon of “men not being able to express their feelings”, tying them up with Patriarchy. How they do it, what they think it means, I won’t get into the details of it because you already know the narrative.

But here’s the reality of it (or at least the various facets of it). Masculinity assertiveness and rationality, and aggressiveness doesn’t necessarily mean violence. A person can be vocally aggressive, very outspoken, like, say, Richard Dawkins in a debate against Creationists, and still have a calm voice. Or they can go even further enough to be offensive, like Christopher Hitchens, who still arguing with a sufficiently agile mind instead of relying on name-calling. Some men, like Hitchens, are boldly offensive, while some others are compassionate. And both kinds of men, throughout their lives, have had the burdens of not having their own feelings understood, or expressing how much they’ve been emotionally wounded.
And no, it has nothing to do with patriarchy.
In some cases, men are told to “deal with it” because they conventionally seem to be “the stronger sex”, or — in the case of feminism — “privileged gender”. In these circumstances, only the most tangible and rational arguments made were ever socially “accepted”, while their own subjective experiences are dismissed as lacking any necessary value. A man expressing his sincere feelings besides the “positives” would receive much admonishment from his peers than a woman. A female child’s feelings are taken more seriously than the concerns of a male child. A man’s weeping wasn’t as productive as a woman’s. Thus, it’s the arguments pertaining to “ideas” rather than their “feelings” is where men’s energies have historically been channelled. That’s where you get the traditional assumption of masculinity, and it’s hardly toxic.
Because even beyond these lie more fundamental truths:
In majority of the cases, individuals (conventionally “men”, but not restricted to men since it’s noticeable in women too) choose to not allow their emotions or feelings to get in the way of their decision-making. Why? Because it’s observable what happens when a person is sufficiently immature to control (not repress) their feelings and are granted the privilege to make decisions: You get bad spending, bad design, bad business, and even warfare.

Even in social life or relationships, a sufficiently mature man may be outspoken, may even be straightforward, but is still likely to hide his inner-most feelings of pain, anguish, anxiety, etc. not because he is forced to, but because this man knows there are more important things to worry about than himself. This man knows that he is not an island. He knows what he feels isn’t important enough to help enact the change that needs to be enacted. He knows his feelings can’t bind communities together, evaluate market situations, come up with amazing designs, make breakthrough discoveries in science, etc. He knows that by expressing his emotions he may even jeopardize relationships, put people on the defensive, and perhaps he himself may do something impractical that may cause more harm to the situation than solve anything. Because the end goal is worth the suppression of pain.

He can’t even tell anyone how much he’s been “hurt”, not because he’s afraid to look weak, but because he either understands that they probably didn’t mean it or he just doesn’t want to make a big deal out of it and make them feel like villains of his story. He doesn’t want them to go away. And he certainly won’t cry until he has closed the door behind him.

This is emotional integrity. This is masculinity: Taking responsibility of one’s feelings, and taking the most practical action possible instead of feeling sorry for oneself. I’m not in the position to say if it’s “right” or “wrong”, but I can say that this is how it’s been, and what we have so far is because of some people’s personal sacrifices that we’ll probably never know about.

And I’m not even bullshitting here. You want proof? Examine the tear-ducts of each sex and tell me what you see. Gender Roles may be a social construct, but what the tear-ducts signify is a signature of our evolutionary past.

And this is why I take issues with Feminism’s consistent demonisation of men, campaigns run to manipulate social structures to their assumptions, and place heavier burdens on men in general, expecting them to “suck it up and take it”. In the guise of liberating men from Patriarchy, they make it even worse for men who are increasingly unable to cope with the difficulties that evolution has granted them, and you get a rapid increase in suicide rates, or even some rare men “snapping” and committing crimes due to the severity of their mental illnesses.

And nobody talks about this. Men don’t talk about it with the assumption that they can, like always, “endure it” and take a more practical approach. Society doesn’t talk about it because, like always, it assumes men are responsible for it and that Feminism is actually doing something good.

I find myself, sitting in grief, listening to the numbers of male deaths ticking like a clock. We are celebrating on tombs we don’t know they’re even there.


Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: