2d ago

Toxic empathy...?

You're viewing a single thread.

175 comments

If toxic masculinity is destructive masculinity like "boys be boys" and neofascist pundits, then toxic empathy would be something like Stockholm-syndrome. In context it does sound more like the expression stems from sociopathy.
- How did "boys will be boys" go from "coming home at age 7 covered in mud, with a skinned knee, and a frog in your pocket" to "sexual assault and felony gun possession?"
  
  Even in the first one, 'boys will be boys' is often used to explain why you react differently to the same scenario depending on whether it's a boy or girl. I remember being scolded for this stuff as an AFAB, while boys got away with it. Same story with getting into little physical fights, being rowdy, aggressive, destroying stuff. I guess that can be a slippery slope into the latter one, if you keep it up long enough. Just my attempt at an explanation.
  
  That's puberty for you! 🤷🏻‍♂️
  
  "Boys will be boys" has always been the hall pass for males to commit sexual crimes since the 80's. What halcyon, lost forgotten era are you trying to evoke? It doesn't matter. You are a shit human being.
  
  That's a bit much. I think you're scolding the wrong person.
  
  Some of us heard our own parents use the phrase to dismiss innocent childhood shenanigans. If people have been using it to dismiss assault since the 80s (which is possible, I'm not doubting that), there were still plenty of people through the 90s and 00s that didn't use it that way.
  What I don't understand is, if OP wasn't exposed to that use of the term and/or didn't realize it at the time (perhaps due to being a child), how does that make them a "shit human being"? Is everyone who doesn't know everything a "shit human being"? Because if so, I've got some bad news.
- I can't really find a better way to phrase it, but I could see an excess of empathy leading to some toxic behaviors. my SiL frequently goes to a church where people "give 'till it hurts" and then next week is the one begging people to help. because they gave away all their savings the week before, and now can't afford the medical procedure they got lined up next week.
  The issue here is that a little financial responsibility would have saved everyone from being in that position in the first place. collectively, the issue is they have no impulse control and a priest taking advantage of it.
- Sounds more like manipulation, when the other comment said it can weaponized, I'm assuming he meant manipulation, which is deceptive and not empathy at all, and that is what sociapaths use
- If it's pulling someone to the left, it can't be toxic. Also, if the headline is a question, it's not a sign of quality. (One point for Betteridge's law of headlines.)
  
  The notion that there are no toxic entities on the left is naive.
  
  Oh believe me, I know firsthand. But empathy isn't the problem
  
  But I didn't say or imply that. I mean, a bit of a pull to the left isn't a bad thing. Drfinately not toxic. I'd rather have untetherd people drift towards political or economic leftism than the alternative, which is cruel stuff like fascism etc..
  
  Give us some examples then.
  
  I mean it's obvious when you involve yourself with local activist groups. Egos, factions, infighting... We're not immune to toxicity, no human groups are.
  
  Do you have some concrete examples?
  
  It feels like you're asking in bad faith. You've never ever had toxic interactions within leftist spaces ? That sounds amazing i'd love to know your local scene.
  In my town there's this anarchist collective who own a screen press and rent it out dirt cheap to projects they like. The operator of the machine is a judgemental asshole who talks down to everyone. What can you do ? Volunteers are hard to come by especially with his skill set. So while everyone tries to work around him the experience always ends up being somewhat toxic.
  Or there's this queer/feminist group that i sometimes help out with social media shit. Governance is supposed to be collegial but there's an inherent power structure to the group which biases all decisions. Making a good point is often less important than making it to the right persons at the right moment, and eliciting the right feelings from them. It's ultimately toxic especially for the younger ones who learn to power-play rather than focus on objectives. But still, the world is a better place with them in it.
  Those are just examples from my limited and superficial experience in these matters. At the end of the day, whatever space you operate in, you have to tolerate some toxicity otherwise everything grinds to a stop.
  
  I like how they say it's both sides, but always generallizes
  
  Extremism exists on all sides. I shouldn't have to cite a source for you to understand that making absolute statements is naive and more often than not, incorrect.
  
  Yeah but some examples would be nice. Should be pretty easy for you.
  
  I shouldn’t have to cite a source for you to understand that making absolute statements is naive and more often than not, incorrect.
  Can you try? Because it sounds like you are being a giant coward and can't even give a single example. C'mon. At least try.
  
  I've been called a name! Oh no...
  
  There's this article about the UK Socialist Workers party trying to hush it up when one of their leaders was accused by multiple women of rape and sexual harassment.

175 comments