> people nowadays have somehow internalized a weird "alpha male, never give up, don't cry, just shut up an resist

I don't know what counts as "nowadays" but this male image has been promoted for a really long time. "Big boys don't cry" and "strong men don't take no for an answer" have been a thing for centuries. Stoicism was centered around emotional self-control more than 2000 years ago.

This survived for so long because we used to live in societies that were very patriarchal. So men knew their role and it was also at the top of the pyramid, all in a precarious equilibrium from a mental health perspective.

What happened nowadays is that society is less patriarchal. Men are no longer at the top of the pyramid, they no longer have a clearly defined societal role, but they still carry some of the old remnants because occasionally that's the expected of them and that's still how many boys are educated. The modern man is locked into a world where his education and emotional toolset are inadequate. They are raised to lock their feelings like an "alpha" but no longer have an outlet for anything because the alpha role in society started evaporating or shifting away from them.

It's a mental health crisis that will overflow sooner or later and it won't be good for anyone around it when it happens.

▲

zozbot234 13 hours ago | parent [-]

> "strong men don't take no for an answer"

This is the exact opposite of what Stoicism teaches. It's all about figuring out as early as possible when you're aiming for an "impossible goal" and should dismiss that goal as something that you really have no control over. As for the emotional control part, the real goal is not to let your emotions affect your behavior in dysfunctional ways. That's why the main focus was not in fact "big boys don't cry", it was "big boys don't get angry/freak out/throw temper tantrums, EVER". Because that kind of unrestrained anger is really bad for you and those around you.

▲

close04 12 hours ago | parent [-]

I wasn't compiling a list list of values that are consistent, just values that were historically taught to boys/men. There were teachings in that vein for centuries and millennia. Some are contradicting ("be a gentleman" / "don't take no for an answer"). Bottom line, "never give up", "control your emotions", "don't cry" are not a "nowadays" thing by any measure.

> That's why the main focus was not in fact "big boys don't cry", it was "big boys don't get angry/freak out/throw temper tantrums, EVER"

In practical experience "boys don't cry" has been a staple of the actual education boys get for centuries. To the point that a lot of boys got a smacking for crying. Temper tantrums are as natural as crying, a reaction to the developing brain. They were considered abnormal and "destructive" because that was the limit of our understanding in child psychology.

On the other hand getting educated to never "get angry/freak out/throw temper tantrums, EVER" is just as toxic. Boys and men are asked to bottle up everything and this sort of worked, still with a high mental health price, in the past when there were outlets for that pressure. With those gone we just made the situation worse.

	▲	zozbot234 12 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You're right that temper tantrums might be natural and excusable from young children and toddlers, but the obvious argument would be that people really should know better at some point as they develop mentally and are able to reflect about the deeper consequences of that kind of behavior. This is not advocating for systematically bottling up emotions, of course; even the ancients were well aware of the difference between temporarily restraining a negative emotion in order to avert its detrimental effects in the moment, as opposed to addressing its root causes (often in terms of unfulfilled expectations and desires) through inner self-reflection and mental exercises.