The Job of the Man Is to Be the Rock

[Joshe]

Insightful video: 

Stoicism or “emotional compression” is emotional labor, which women expect. 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

Yep - I agree. It is a form of emotional labour many women are completely blind to. Teal Swan would call this 'containment'

It is also a process I am familiar with myself, as I am often the one to perform 'emotional compression' for others. Although at a guess this might come down to personality type and balance of masculine/feminine. Never had an issue with holding space for others emotionally. I am very reserved expressing my own emotions moreso. 

Have you had issue navigating emotional landscapes when emoting, as this fella suggests many men do, when unfamiliar with expression? Some men have A LOT going on and when given an opportunely to express it can be like a damn overflowing. I could NEVER punish someone for such an earnest expression. Immaturity does that.

Personally, I have no issue when men cry. I never get the 'ick'. 

I definitely agree that if you do not fit societies standard for gender emotional expression you are denigrated for it. I am punished pretty hard for being blunt and candid when I have a big agenda I need to execute. And woman to woman - if I do not emote properly, as society deems I should, I get slapped with being cold. Heard THAT before....

[theleelajoker]

3 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Yep - I agree. It is a form of emotional labour many women are completely blind to. Teal Swan would call this 'containment'

It is also a process I am familiar with myself, as I am often the one to perform 'emotional compression' for others. Although at a guess this might come down to personality type and balance of masculine/feminine. Never had an issue with holding space for others emotionally. I am very reserved expressing my own emotions moreso. 

Have you had issue navigating emotional landscapes when emoting, as this fella suggests many men do, when unfamiliar with expression? Some men have A LOT going on and when given an opportunely to express it can be like a damn overflowing. I could NEVER punish someone for such an earnest expression. Immaturity does that.

Personally, I have no issue when men cry. I never get the 'ick'. 

I definitely agree that if you do not fit societies standard for gender emotional expression you are denigrated for it. I am punished pretty hard for being blunt and candid when I have a big agenda I need to execute. And woman to woman - if I do not emote properly, as society deems I should, I get slapped with being cold. Heard THAT before....

I think there's something to what he says. 

Due to my professional experience / training, psychedelics, Vipassana it also easy to for me to hold the space for others and I became much better in dealing with my own. Sometimes people are like "I hope that isn't too much now telling you this and that" and all I think is a) No, not at all and b) You have no idea what I have already seen   Of course there is still stuff I need to deal with, not all emotions are integrated, but it's light years from where I was years ago. 

I can see how others had difficulties when I was expressing. As he said in the video, IME humans can only handle as much emotions from someone else as you can handle your own. Does not matter if its a man or a woman. So what happens is that sometimes if I expressed, the other person gets afraid of her own emotions, feelings. The typical reaction is then that people retreat (men and women) or get aggressive (stronger tendency for that with men, only one woman ever was like that). 

Interesting is however, that that is only one side of the coin. Because I feel the the emotions want to be expressed by the others. It just subconsciously. People were looking to talk to me, they give subtle hints in their words and actions, they were looking for interaction with me, there was a part in them that finally wants to be free of these emotions. Because it seems that only when expressing, or at passing through them (Vipassana) you can finally get free of them. 

Re society standards: I got to experience the whole spectrum.

• One guy calling me a woman for expressing once. Funny thing is, our conversation pushed him so hard that he already had tears forming in his eyes, he was close to crying (so who's the woman ahaha )  but I let it go because he appeared to me just like a helpless kid. 
• Some women explicitly told me that they like when I express. "It makes me trust you more" one said once
• Some men are looking for my proximity, because as long as I have enough status in their eyes me doing it gives them allowance to actually feel stuff, too

Re society standards there's a simply guideline for me: What kind of "man" would I be if I let ANYONE ELSE dictate what I SHOULD or SHOULDN'T do or feel? What kind of "man" are you that you hold yourself back, that you even hurt yourself because you once heard someone say how the world should be? So you prefer to live in a prison instead of shaping the world with your actions? Pfffff 

Funny thing is, handling / expressing your emotions gives you incredible power. For once, for oneself, loosing fear of feeling sth, increasing quality of life. Second, It can make you kind of invincible in arguments, fights. When people feel that they can't hurt you with words, can't put you off balance because you are not afraid of feeling whatever comes - they are likely to get much more peaceful, much more cooperative, much more constructive. Because they know their fears, they are aware of their suppressed feelings and they know I COULD push this button anytime. And with nothing to "fight" back, the best strategy is to be resolve this thing peaceful. Which is - as long as the other one is respectful -  my preferred option, too.

 

 

Edited August 11 by theleelajoker

[Lyubov]

A man has no job for anyone but himself. Do not do this for women. Do it for yourself. Women benefiting from this is just a byproduct of you taking good care of yourself first. Don’t look for women to extend understanding to your faulty belief system of being inadequate. Ultimately you will have to extend these teachings to your woman too because a lot of the time they would benefit a good bit from it as well. It’s a form of emotional manipulation by crying and expecting people to constantly bend to your wishes because you feel sad. 

[Joshe]

9 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Teal Swan would call this 'containment'

Yeah, that's apt. 

9 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

It is also a process I am familiar with myself, as I am often the one to perform 'emotional compression' for others. Although at a guess this might come down to personality type and balance of masculine/feminine. Never had an issue with holding space for others emotionally. I am very reserved expressing my own emotions moreso. 

Yeah, personality type is huge. I had an INFP friend who was like a 9 on the looks scale and would easily attract women but he couldn't keep them around to save his life due to emotional neediness. I knew that was the reason they would all jump ship but I had a hard time telling him what he had to do to change because how do you tell someone to not be emotionally weak or habitually emotionally vulnerable when it's baked into their personality? 

9 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Have you had issue navigating emotional landscapes when emoting, as this fella suggests many men do, when unfamiliar with expression? Some men have A LOT going on and when given an opportunely to express it can be like a damn overflowing. I could NEVER punish someone for such an earnest expression. Immaturity does that.

Personally, I have no issue when men cry. I never get the 'ick'. 

I rarely feel the need to express emotions outwardly to other people. Like if a tragedy happens, I need to be left alone to process and grieve. There's nothing anyone can do or say to make me feel better. I don't want hugs. I get little to no catharsis from sharing my emotions with others. The only time I need to share is when there's a relationship problem to solve. But I'm not very emotional in general. I'm most emotional in dealing with loss of a loved one or something like that. I tend to be the one struggling the most at family member funerals. That's about the only situation I can't contain it and it becomes like a bursting dam. But I never felt any frustration regarding not being able to emote. I can emote quite well, I just don't see much point in doing it outwardly unless for strategic reasons. 

I did however witness girls getting the "ick" feeling when I was less mature in relationships. I remember one time crying my heart out to a girl that just left me and I could see it on her face. This fed my narrative that women were cold, which led to a maladaptive response, which I grew out of in late 20s. I now see the "ick" response as something like an evolutionary mechanism designed to make men stronger. I see it as an adaptive challenge, which I think is a frame men would do well to adopt, as opposed to the frame of a victim, blaming women for this or that. 

Edited Monday at 05:29 PM by Joshe

[Joshe]

8 hours ago, Lyubov said:

A man has no job for anyone but himself. Do not do this for women. Do it for yourself. Women benefiting from this is just a byproduct of you taking good care of yourself first. Don’t look for women to extend understanding to your faulty belief system of being inadequate. Ultimately you will have to extend these teachings to your woman too because a lot of the time they would benefit a good bit from it as well. It’s a form of emotional manipulation by crying and expecting people to constantly bend to your wishes because you feel sad. 

Women are the main facilitators of the attainment of this strength. But most guys respond with lifelong cynicism towards women rather than adapting. 

To be honest, I too am quite repulsed by men (and women) crying over nothing or crying often. If he's crying from beauty or love or something like that, that's fine, cry as much as you like, but crying about things not going your way in life or relationships warrants the "ick" response.

Edited Monday at 09:07 PM by Joshe

[theleelajoker]

Birds fly. Fishes swim. Humans cry.  

No one cares if people sneeze. It's a biological function. Crying has value (see article below). 

1 hour ago, Joshe said:

I now see the "ick" response as something like an evolutionary mechanism designed to make men stronger.

@Joshe Seriously, I have seen countless great takes from you but that one surprises me  I don't see any evidence, not the slightest, that the "ick" has anything to do with an evolutionary mechanism. It's your own subjective evaluation projected on the outside. Moreover, you got it the wrong way: NOT CRYING makes you WEAKER while crying is actually the thing that makes you stronger (article below). 

Here are already two people saying completely different things about getting or not getting the ick. With me it's a third, a different perspective - not only do I not get the ick response, I welcome when people cry. They do it for themselves, not for me or to influence me.  I let them cry, stay calm, just stay present, sometimes hug them if my intuition tells me to,  but mostly I just leave them alone until they are finished.

Crying for happiness, don't think anyone says something against it. I cried because of happiness because of sunset in amazons, and I cried for happiness during meditation. Great stuff. 

Crying for other reason then happiness I welcome for two reasons: First, afterwards the person feels better and whatever the topic was, it's much lighter and more constructive now. Second, I know they are not hiding or suppressing their emotions, and they are not afraid being authentic.

It's the cultural perception of crying and the individual evaluation that are the problem, not the crying itself. In the city I live there are groups of men meeting, just men so that they can FINALLY open up, some of them to cry (cry uninhibited) because they are afraid to do it if there are women around. Alright, this is where we are in society....

https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/is-crying-good-for-you-2021030122020

As a phenomenon that is unique to humans, crying is a natural response to a range of emotions, from deep sadness and grief to extreme happiness and joy. But is crying good for your health? The answer appears to be yes. Medical benefits of crying have been known as far back as the Classical era. Thinkers and physicians of ancient Greece and Rome posited that tears work like a purgative, draining off and purifying us. Today’s psychological thought largely concurs, emphasizing the role of crying as a mechanism that allows us to release stress and emotional pain.

Crying is an important safety valve, largely because keeping difficult feelings inside — what psychologists call repressive coping — can be bad for our health. Studies have linked repressive coping with a less resilient immune system, cardiovascular disease, and hypertension, as well as with mental health conditions, including stress, anxiety, and depression. Crying has also been shown to increase attachment behavior, encouraging closeness, empathy, and support from friends and family.

 

[meta_male]

1 hour ago, Joshe said:

I had an INFP friend who was like a 9 on the looks scale and would easily attract women but he couldn't keep them around to save his life due to emotional neediness. I knew that was the reason they would all jump ship but I had a hard time telling him what he had to do to change because how do you tell someone to not be emotionally weak or habitually emotionally vulnerable when it's baked into their personality?

It isn't baked into their personality. Not everything needs to be shared is what an INFP needs to learn. You could tell him this straight to his face, as long as you're being warm. What's worse for him is not knowing why he repels women.

[Joshe]

15 minutes ago, meta_male said:

It isn't baked into their personality. Not everything needs to be shared is what an INFP needs to learn. You could tell him this straight to his face, as long as you're being warm. What's worse for him is not knowing why he repels women.

That's true. I'm not good with words and don't have time to make everything precise. "Predispose" would have been better.

Because he's lead Fi, it's hard for him to not be overly vulnerable in relationships. Of course that isn't the only factor, but I count it as a big one, for him. 

[Joshe]

@theleelajoker Thanks!

1 hour ago, theleelajoker said:

I don't see any evidence, not the slightest, that the "ick" has anything to do with an evolutionary mechanism. 

Yes, I didn't mean to imply that's the truth of the matter, just a frame. I think we can agree that it's better for men to accept reality than be bitter towards it.

When men interpret women as being cold to their emotions, they could sulk into that and become bitter towards women in general (which is the typical response I've seen IME), or they can find another, healthier frame that doesn't include victimhood.

The frames that appeal to me may not be appealing or compatible for you. This frame was just my strategy, which I found helpful. Whatever frame or strategy chosen, it should not suppress, reject, or deny the core reality. A healthy strategy would acknowledge the truth and orient one towards positivity. So as long as your strategy can check those boxes, it's much healthier than the typical response. 

Also, I don't have anything against crying in general. I actually like crying, in private lol. It's cathartic. A while back, I cried for like 30 minutes listening to the song "White Flag" by Dido. No idea even why, as I didn't relate to anything in the song. It was just me projecting several layers of meaning onto the singer's reality and found it emotionally rich and beautiful. 

The truth of the matter is when men cry over trivial things in front of women, the women see it as weakness...because it often is. You need some control over your emotional state. I don't mean suppression. I mean actually not being bothered by trivial things. Expressing emotions is fine. But if you need to express emotions triggered by petty things, that's the weakness, not crying. Crying is just the expression that reveals the weakness. 

Also, @Lyubov mentioned the reality that many people use crying as a form of manipulation, which is certainly true. I've seen men do this as well. 

Edited Monday at 08:20 PM by Joshe

[Schizophonia]

A man can be very sensitive and still be a functional person; be strong and attractive in his way.

Edited Monday at 07:30 PM by Schizophonia

[Schizophonia]

What we intuitively consider being masculin is actually lowkey the appropriation of the father’s phallus (by imitation) during oeudipus complexe. 

[theleelajoker]

23 minutes ago, Joshe said:

@theleelajoker Thanks!

Yes, I didn't mean to imply that's the truth of the matter, just a frame. I think we can agree that it's better for men to accept reality than be bitter towards it.

When men interpret women as being cold to their emotions, they could sulk into that and become bitter towards women in general (which is the typical response I've seen IME), or they can find another, healthier frame that doesn't include victimhood.

The frames that appeal to me may not be appealing or compatible for you. This frame was just my strategy, which I found helpful. Whatever frame or strategy chosen, it should not suppress, reject, or deny the core reality. A healthy strategy would acknowledge the truth and orient one towards positivity. So as long as your strategy can check those boxes, it's probably good. 

Also, I don't have anything against crying in general. I actually like crying, in private lol. It's cathartic. A while back, I cried for like 30 minutes listening to the song "White Flag" by Dido. No idea even why, as I didn't relate to anything in the song. It was just me projecting several layers of meaning onto the singer's reality and found it emotionally rich and beautiful. 

The truth of the matter is when men cry over trivial things in front of women, the women see it as weakness...because it is. You need some control over your emotional state. I don't mean suppression. I mean actually not being emotionally bothered by trivial things. Expressing emotions is fine. But if you need to express emotions triggered by petty things, that's the weakness, not crying. Crying is just the expression of the weakness. 

Also, @Lyubov mentioned the reality that many people use crying as a form of manipulation, which is certainly true. I've seen men do this as well. 

OK got you

Misunderstanding you when I read your post before.

But nobody can manipulate you unless you let him/her do it. It takes two to tango. And I don't feel ANYONE ever cried in my presence with the intention of manipulating me. It's something I only know from movies, series but not real life (maybe I did not notice, can't exclude that oc).

One other thing:  "cry over trivial things" --> trivial or not is HIGHLY individual. The fact that one cries over sth means it's not trivial for them. And I don't equate crying or expressing emotions as weakness. You can flip the script easily around. It's weak not to feel what is, and it's strong and courageous to fully express.  Weak is to feel so insecure that you keep your human organism from crying, keeping it from doing what's healthy for it. 

I went to chatgpt and  looked at the historical perception of crying. You can see where the narrative changed more towards what typical "masculine" narrative is inherited from our parents (marked blue) or the opposite (green)...it's just that. JUST A NARRATIVE

1. Ancient Societies – Tears as Public and Communal

• In many ancient cultures, crying wasn’t considered a private weakness—it was often a public, communal act.
• Mesopotamia & Egypt: Crying at funerals was expected; professional mourners were sometimes hired to wail loudly. Tears were seen as a sign of respect for the dead and a way to guide the soul.
• Ancient Greece: Philosophers had mixed views. Homeric heroes wept openly—Achilles, Odysseus, and others cried in front of their peers without stigma. Later philosophers like the Stoics began framing excessive crying as a loss of rational control.
• Ancient China: Confucian ideals encouraged crying for filial piety—grieving for parents could include ritual weeping for years.

2. Early Religions – Tears as Spiritual Expression

• Tears were seen not just as emotional but as spiritually potent.
• Biblical Traditions: Tears could signify repentance, compassion, or divine favor (e.g., Mary Magdalene washing Jesus’ feet with tears).
• Medieval Christianity: “Gift of tears” was considered a sign of holiness—saints were praised for weeping during prayer.
• Islamic traditions: Crying when reciting the Qur’an was a sign of deep piety and humility before God

3. Medieval & Renaissance Europe – Theatrical Mourning

• From the 13th to 17th centuries in Europe, public displays of grief were still acceptable.
• Noble courts often had elaborate mourning rituals with open crying.
• Renaissance literature (e.g., Shakespeare) portrayed men and women crying, though the tone shifted—male crying became more constrained in heroic contexts.

4. Enlightenment & 18th Century – Sentimentality as Refinement

• The Age of Sensibility (late 17th–18th c.) saw tears as signs of moral virtue.
• Novels like Richardson’s Pamela and Rousseau’s Julie glorified weeping as proof of a tender heart.
• Middle- and upper-class men could be “manly” and still cry—especially over literature, music, or moral dilemmas.
• However, philosophers like Kant began pushing for emotional moderation, planting seeds for modern stoicism.

5. 19th Century – Gendered Tear Norms

• Industrial modernity brought new divides.
• Victorian Britain: Women were encouraged to cry as an expression of femininity, morality, and compassion.
• Men’s tears became stigmatized in public life, except for exceptional circumstances (war funerals, death of a monarch).
• Colonial attitudes often labeled crying in non-Western cultures as “primitive” or “over-emotional,” revealing ethnocentric biases.

6. 20th Century – Crying as Weakness (and Reclamation)

The 20th century split crying into “private” and “public” spaces.

• Early to mid-century: In many Western countries, stoicism—especially male stoicism—was idealized. Emotional restraint was linked to professionalism and strength.
• Post-1960s: With the counterculture, therapy movements, and feminism, crying was reframed as healthy emotional expression.
• Late 20th century media: Celebrities, athletes, and politicians crying became more common—though often judged differently by gender.

7. 21st Century – Crying in a Globalized, Digital Age

• Today, cultural perceptions are fragmented and context-dependent.
• Mental health awareness has reframed crying as a natural coping mechanism.
• Social media makes crying visible in new ways (livestream grief, emotional reaction videos).
• In some professional and political spaces, crying can still be interpreted as a loss of control—particularly for women, who face a “double bind.”
• Different cultures maintain different norms: Japan may still see public crying as shameful; in Mediterranean and some Latin American cultures, public emotionality remains more accepted.

Edited Monday at 07:51 PM by theleelajoker

[Joshe]

34 minutes ago, theleelajoker said:

Only exception: "cry over trivial things" --> trivial or not is HIGHLY individual. The fact that one cries over sth means it's not trivial for them. 

That's true, usually. And I can empathize with those crying over what I interpret as trivial, but at same time, there must be a call for strength, because I want my fellows to be strong, so they don't suffer.

If a man cries because he's afraid of the dark, I'm calling that trivial and he should have transcended it by now. This is not to belittle him, but to acknowledge the reality that he has yet to learn how to deal with his emotions, with the point being for him to deal with his emotions, rather than be told it's perfectly fine to allow them to persist simply because they are genuinely there. The fact that they are there is evidence they should be dealt with - not evidence that they should be made a habit out of indulging.

Many seem to actually want to snuggle up to fragility as a social strategy. I'd bet many of the men in those "crying clubs" fit that bill. And IMO, it's likely not healthy, although I am biased here. 

Also, I agree with your point that crying is often a sign of strength rather than weakness.

Edited Monday at 08:23 PM by Joshe

[theleelajoker]

8 minutes ago, Joshe said:

That's true, usually. And I can empathize with those crying over what I interpret as trivial, but at same time, there must be a call for strength.

If a man cries because he's afraid of the dark, I'm calling that trivial and he should have transcended it by now. This is not to belittle him, but to acknowledge the reality that he has yet to learn how to deal with his emotions, with the point being for him to deal with his emotions, rather than be told it's perfectly fine to allow them to persist simply because they are genuinely there. The fact that they are there is evidence they should be dealt with - not made a habit of indulging. 

Many seem to actually want to snuggle up to fragility as a social strategy. I'd bet many of the men in those "crying clubs" fit that bill. And IMO, it's likely not healthy, although I am biased here. 

Yeah, I look at crying like a tool. Once I cried, I feel more calm, more ready to do what I need to do. THAT'S dealing with emotions for me. Feel them, move on. How long does it take to cry? 5 Minutes max?  Then the emotions are out of the system and you move on. Simple. 

It's the vipassana training for me. Feel it, acknowledge it, move on. Don'T get stuck on it, I get you there. But we talk about 5 Minutes crying, not weeping for weeks and feeling pity with yourself non-stop. 

Edited Monday at 08:23 PM by theleelajoker

[Joshe]

4 minutes ago, theleelajoker said:

Yeah, I look at crying like a tool. Once I cried, I feel more calm, more ready to do what I need to do. THAT'S dealing with emotions for me. Feel them, move on. How long does it take to cry? 5 Minutes max?  Then the emotions are out of the system and you move on. Simple. 

It's the vipassana training for me. Feel it, acknowledge it, move on. Don'T get stuck on it, I get you there. But we talk about 5 Minutes crying, not weeping for weeks and feeling pity with yourself non-stop. 

Yeah, I love the tension that gets released in a deep cry. Something interesting I discovered recently: I can trigger a similar effect by stimulating my trigeminal nerve with a vibrator to make myself sneeze. After sneezing like 20-30 times, it feels like I just cried a lot. 

[theleelajoker]

13 minutes ago, Joshe said:

Yeah, I love the tension that gets released in a deep cry. Something interesting I discovered recently: I can trigger a similar effect by stimulating my trigeminal nerve with a vibrator to make myself sneeze. After sneezing like 20-30 times, it feels like I just cried a lot. 

 

First time I hear about this nerve

[Joshe]

2 minutes ago, theleelajoker said:

First time I hear about this nerve

Haha, yeah, one day I was just putting a vibrator on different spots of my face and found it. Pretty amazing. lol. 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

7 hours ago, meta_male said:

It isn't baked into their personality. Not everything needs to be shared is what an INFP needs to learn. You could tell him this straight to his face, as long as you're being warm. What's worse for him is not knowing why he repels women.

This is very true - my brother types INFP. Lovely man, but chronic oversharer. I don't need to hear it! He and I went to battle as kids. I am the heartless one

5 hours ago, theleelajoker said:

Yeah, I look at crying like a tool. Once I cried, I feel more calm, more ready to do what I need to do. THAT'S dealing with emotions for me. Feel them, move on. How long does it take to cry? 5 Minutes max?  Then the emotions are out of the system and you move on. Simple. 

It's the vipassana training for me. Feel it, acknowledge it, move on. Don'T get stuck on it, I get you there. But we talk about 5 Minutes crying, not weeping for weeks and feeling pity with yourself non-stop. 

Yes, crying is a huge release for me too. I feel VERY calm after. I rarely cry though.

I process all my emotions internally. I don't like to talk about the process. I find it very uncomfortable to be 'in process' and have someone try to elicit anything out of me. Afterwards when I have clarity and distance I am okay to speak about it. But during I am super private. As you can imagine - this is an example of a woman not fitting the expected mould of society (which fits the youtube link above). Usually ends up with segregation or the old aloof/snob label. Interestingly, I thought feeling emotion strongly made me an Fe user, and hence mistyped as INFJ for the longest time. It was @Joshe who pointed out I was showing more INTJ traits. But looking back I actually do not show Fe at all...

[Hojo]

In order to get a woman you must, risk ego by engaging.

Taking care of the person physically from harm, risking physical harm potentially dying

Never get boring always listen, but never express yourself except for certain tailored eays

Change your entire identity to what the woman wants

Disconnect from all emotions become a rock not a human being.

All this so the woman can say I have something that will not react when I go crazy.

 

The man gets to pretend that something loves him, while accepting the other unconditionally.

Thank God God exists to stop this madness.

Fellas it is 100 times easier to say God loves me unconditionally and is the perfect woman.  

Edited Tuesday at 02:47 AM by Hojo