
A
thread of masculine twittery↱ begins:
A woman should always take her man's side on everything, even if she secretly disagrees with him. It's not her place to humiliate him, argue with him, bring him shame, or make him look bad in front of others. Disagreements are discussed privately. In public, you're always united.
Don't say "and vice versa" or "this goes the other way" as if to imply equality.
There is no equality, and you're missing a ton of nuance. And if this tweet offends you in some way, or you feel the need to correct it with some equalist notion, politely fuckoff and unfollow.
Ideally, you maintain each other's dignity. But this is not an ideal world. Men don't "test their woman's authority" because women don't lead. A woman told off by her man too harshly is sympathised with, a man told off by his woman is ridiculed. NOT THE SAME. NOT EQUAL. GET IT?
At this point it's probably worth reminding that he is describing a masculine and masculinist standard. In other words, it stands out when boys start screeching about their own damn rules.
Seriously, though, the author bio explains it is his "life's work to improve the quality and character of men to ensure their might, honour and wisdom - to make men of boys and kings of men!" Within that purview, he
explains to women↱, "a wife is a wife, and no matter who he may be, it's her sacred duty to make her husband look good." There comes a point at which Poe's Law might seem to apply, but, no, this sort of stuff is well within the bounds of reality for these emotionally fragile manly-men.
There comes a point at which for malice or stupidity, there really isn't any kind assessment for this sort of attitude or rant. A manly man who cannot maintain his own merit without requiring a woman to do it for him is no proper man, or something like that. It's one of the puzzles of this masculine dependency on women. Moreover
inasmuch as↱, "A woman's respectability is rooted in her sexual purity and feminine warmth", I don't know which part should we go with, the one about how maybe he should learn to fuck, or the one about wondering how much attention this brand of masculine insecurity is really worth.
Sad thing is, dude might be hurting inside, but there's not much anyone can do for hurt he delivers unto himself. And maybe this guy isn't going to shoot the place up along the way, but this really is among the stuff we tried to ignore as much as we could until the bratty-boy masculinists started shooting up the place. It's always a weird spectacle, and generally unsettling.
To the degree that even I weary of the term,
toxic masculinity, what do we do with the idea of sickness? Calling him a sick bastard doesn't really help, but neither would he appreciate a more compassionate consideration of sickness that inherently doubts his competency.
Still, inasmuch as one has an identity investment in the disapprobation such performances seem designed to invite, the question of being either
sinister or noncompetent still erodes confidence in one's reliability.
How is it that self-denigration is a masculine identity politic?
____________________
Notes:
@TellYourSonThis. "A woman should always take her man's side on everything, even if she secretly disagrees with him. It's not her place to humiliate him, argue with him, bring him shame, or make him look bad in front of others. Disagreements are discussed privately. In public, you're always united." Twitter. (Thread.) 12 February 2021. Twitter.com. 18 February 2021. https://bit.ly/3byARYf