Unsure what this has to do with my comment which was in reply to your statement about not knowing what the statement in the original post likely meant by “relaxing”. I never stated the friends must be women.

Trans guy here - in part what I think might be meant is the pressure of expected romance. Like it is certainly a thing when younger AFAB people are trying to find regular old cis male companionship that there’s often this sort of pressure where you can tell when someone is crushing on you and it’s a matter of if and when they make their move. That time can be dreaded because a lot of the time once someone makes their move if the romantic advance isn’t accepted the friendship disappears and the feeling left behind is that you were never a friend at all. That you were tricked into valuing a friendship that wasn’t real because it was a down payment on an expected return of sexual or romantic affection.

And yes, I am aware it’s awkward and hard to stay around someone who rejected you romantically. It’s also hard to lose a friend because of something you had literally no control over and to mourn that. Sticking around and remaining a friend and getting past your romantic flop is a service to all sides involved if what you actually feel is cut off from friendship. Otherwise it really makes the assertion that this isn’t about sex ring very hollow.

In my 20’s an asexual closeted trans person who counted men as my tribe and wanted nothing but friends that felt normal and lasted - at one point I got so desperate I agreed to a sexless “romantic” relationship by way of fear of losing my best friend. Even though my “boyfriend” was a perfect gentleman during the time we were “together” I ended up in a two year long situationship that in the end felt skeezy and colors that time of my life in a sense of wrongness. I never developed romantic feelings and that whole set up ended up being sickening and oppressive. After it ended that friendship became remote and I lost what I valued somewhere along the line anyway.

It doesn’t surprise me that so many women aren’t all that empathetic to the male loneliness epidemic even though in this post it is being expressed in a really shit way. It doesn’t take many guys dumping you on your ass simply because they got attracted to you and decided not to stick around afterwards before you start feeling like their lonely heart is not your problem to solve. It feels just like if you had a friend who was using you for your money or some sort of service you were providing. Feeling used and discarded is traumatic. People who get hurt this way start getting very suspicious of new friendships and maintain distance because they are guarding from getting hurt again.

In summary - It’s really hard to relax around someone who is coming at you with an expectation you might not be able to meet. The more obvious it is the more you can potentially save yourself the trouble of not getting invested early.

And trans men, don’t forget about us!

Real bloody fun to be arrested by police srripped and humiliated or run out by security guards or assaulted by patrons all while being treated like perverts for following idiot laws to the letter by peeing in the “correct” bathroom…

Cis folk… Are you doing okay? We of the trans community are getting concerned for you.

Her last name is Wilson… Is there some really terrible Wilson I don’t know about?

I think you are placing the bar for facism a bit high friend. You don’t have to be in government or influential in any way to be a fascist. You can be a homeless person who hasn’t spoken to another person in a year and still be a fascist. You can also be a fascist without believing that you are…

Fascism is both a set of beliefs taken to an extreme and actions wittingly or not done that furthers the power or reach of an organized group who holds those beliefs. More or less it means facism can be something you do rather than something you believe strongly in. Your rank and file facist is tricked into the position.

Joe Rogan is either a facist or a puppet/ tool of facists that serves as a algorithm kidnapper into their pipeline to normalize their veiw points. Whether Rogan himself holds these beliefs personally is kind of irrelevant. It is the use to which he has been put and the damage is done.

Absolutely. I belong to a non cheating group. It’s just seems completely unfathomable that it could happen. Most of us are in 15+ year relationships and are friends with everyone. It’s not just a “the women are friends with the women, the men are friends with the men” situation. We got a blend of genders all participating in the same hobbies. There would be so much social cost to cheating it would be kind of insane.

Where I work though there’s a decent amount of drama in that regard though and I have noticed that one common factor is that the relationships are atomized. They either keep their old friends going in and there’s almost zero expectation of their partners integrating into each other’s friendships or there’s just this expectation that men and women are fundamentally different creatures. That whole men are from Mars women from Venus shtick. From the outside it seems like emotional distance where people look at each other like they aren’t targets of empathy - more like they play by a book as if they can just put the right inputs in they will get the desired outputs.

I know this is entirely anedotal and that anybody could theoretically cheat for any number of reasons… It’s just something that I noticed about the groups of cheats that I am aware of.

Probably not vaccinated for e coli. There’s very few options and most only work very short term. This smacks of reckless child endangerment.

I mean Cholera is kind of not the issue here. This creek has habitually tested high for e coli. An e coli infection makes cholera seem tame. You treat cholera it’s got a mortality rate of less than 1%… E coli infection has a mortality rate around 17% slightly less than one in five people who get hit die from renal failure. Those odds go up significantly for kids…

This idiot brought his grandkids to splash in this e coli laced stream. I am without words.

It really isn’t that simple. The north didn’t have as much strict segregation but in a way it was because they didn’t have to. Economic pressure reinforced by subversive hiring practices, prejudice in housing and hostile attitudes kept black communities tight knit and localized which meant you didn’t have to have specific “Colored schools” because they were created by these forces squeezing folks together into controllable blocks of population.

In the South the fall of segregation had a number of nasty fallouts which harmed black communities as well. When they merged the systems there was a historicly significant loss of black teachers. People got up in arms over really stupid questions like “What if my menstruating daughter had a black male teacher” and that prejudice ensured that a lot of the teachers who understood the challenges of being black in America were no longer in a position to help students.

This meant that effectively in the North segregated schooling continued to be a thing in practice but not in name while in the South it wiped out infrastructure that was helping black students succeed. It was handled incredibly poorly and was not unambiguously good but it did change a lot of the legal categorizations and is considered a win.

Technically that was a calculated movement of it’s time. They wanted a black character in a role that spoke to an easy childhood concept of authority to imply that power dynamically having black people in a dominant respected role in social spaces is a normal thing one doesn’t need to get upset over. Hence the whole friendly cop thing.

They were aware through the gay black actor they had in the role that police was something minority communities had issues with but the hope at the time was that more diversity in the force would be a solve. It’s naive from a modern standpoint but they did try.

It was sad that they purposefully kept the gay part of the actor’s identity under wraps. They knew they were asking him to do something harmful by keeping his private life strictly secret but the actor agreed that he was doing something he deemed worth the sacrifice.

“Toxic” has a wide range of uses outside just toxic masculinity or just describing men. One of the side effects of a very therapized society is wider recognizing that some people in your life are dragging you down because their behaviour is unhealthy for all parties. Before the reaction groomed mostly into women but men to a lesser degree was to shut up, take the abuse, take the hit to the psyche, self doctor yourself using coping mechanisms that don’t address the problem directly and endure because the pressure was on being a dutiful, selfless sibling, child, partner, parent, friend etc.

Describing people as “toxic”, while like any tool can be used wrongly or hurtfully gives people a tool to shake themselves out of that cycle. When used properly it empowers people to take their own status and wellbeing seriously when they are being taken for granted, abused or bullied so that they can source the problem and engage with people in a way that wins them their agency back. When we talk about “Toxic men” isn’t effectively any different than talking about “toxic siblings” or “toxic friends” or “toxic parents” or “toxic narcissists” The only ways it differs is in the behaviour dynamics of the group in question. These people are all uniquely “toxic” but in each of those cases you probably gain a different picture of what that toxicity looks like. Those are not individuals, they are groups within our cultures the reclassification of which is systemic. What needs to be emphasized is that in all cases nobody should be forced into a relationship of any kind, friend, family or romantic. There is a society wide push for true emancipation of the individual free to establish and demolish social ties based on the merit of the tie.

In some ways this loneliness epidemic we’re experiencing may in part be due to this renegotiation of relationships in a bid to make things better overall. One could argue the development of an expectation for too perfect boundaries is maybe a contributing factor but overall the attitude across the board is “enough is enough” and that isn’t nessisarily a bad thing. If people are not forced into connections at a systemic level they can apply consent and engineer for everyone the understanding that people either must act at the very least decently if not kindly and with respect if they want deep connection.

So much of the discussion around the subject of toxic masculinity devolves into either the idea the people critiquing the behaviour are being mean towards and victimizing men but all discussions of toxic behaviours are not about victimizing the perpetrators, it’s about advocating for better conditions for the targets.