Do You Believe in the Phrase "Real Men Don't Cry"?

[Sublime Manic]

For me it's kinda abnormal. A man being emotional is weird. It's weak. I could understand if it's something really serious but why would someone cry in front of me? What would that person expect from me ? I don't know how I would respond to that. Same as you Rehab... Dunno how to react to someone crying in fromt of me, especially a man.

It's more awkward than anything else for me.

The problem with showing your weak side to people is that whenever they'll see you later they will always remember that time where you were weak in front of them and they will always remember it.

How, pray tell, is a guy who happens to demonstrate that his tear ducts are functional in your presence, expecting anything from you? And why the bloody fuck is a man who has emotions and demonstrates them somehow 'weak' in any way, shape, or form? How is being emotional a weakness, exactly? And why is it worse if it's a man than if it's a woman?

Seems like some highly sexist nonsense with a dose of antiquated social constructions, sir.

As for myself, of course I don't believe such a ridiculous phrase. I'll cry when something is particularly moving enough to warrant it.

Edited May 10, 2013 by Sublime Manic

[Espinosa]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9hOFOgqOds

But really, why deceive everyone and mostly yourself? Existence is eternally plagued with affliction and crying is an appropriate reaction at times. The only question is when it is appropriate, but people are tuned differently, and there certainly shouldn't be a police going around telling people when it's okay and not okay to cry.

[Nightmare]

Real men cry. They cry very manly tears, and I am one such man. It's through knowing both victory and defeat, running wild and shedding tears, that a man truly grows up. Don't be afraid to cry...!!

Though in general, I don't really cry.

Edited May 10, 2013 by Nightmare

[BluBlaDe]

How, pray tell, is a guy who happens to demonstrate that his tear ducts are functional in your presence, expecting anything from you? And why the bloody fuck is a man who has emotions and demonstrates them somehow 'weak' in any way, shape, or form? How is being emotional a weakness, exactly? And why is it worse if it's a man than if it's a woman?

Seems like some highly sexist nonsense with a dose of antiquated social constructions, sir.

As for myself, of course I don't believe such a ridiculous phrase. I'll cry when something is particularly moving enough to warrant it.

Why would he cry in front of me ? Why would he do that ? Surely he expect me to react? Or else that person would cry elsewhere.

And how should I react ? By comforting said person like anyone would do ?

For me there are two or three reasons :

1 : The person is genuinely sad. I should comfort him/her

2 : The person wants attention and wants me to do something for him/her. A simple '' Hey I need your help for something'' would suffice.

3 : Emotional manipulation. I somehow made the person sad and should do what said person wants even if it is not something I would normally do.

And maybe some people are REALLY emotional but it sounds unreal.

Anyway have you guys ever seen a man crying in front of you ? It sounds like a lot of you guys did. Never happened to me.

[Esau of Isaac]

How, pray tell, is a guy who happens to demonstrate that his tear ducts are functional in your presence, expecting anything from you?

Because in most societies we are taught to deaden some emotions in public, usually to ease social interaction. It's why most people react awkwardly to such displays.

And why the bloody fuck is a man who has emotions and demonstrates them somehow 'weak' in any way, shape, or form?

Because sadness is a sign of instability, at least at that moment. More, it shows that the person is possibly over-emotional. In the case of a car accident, it's common to quickly point blame. There are instances where the situation was out of drivers' hands, but people naturally look for patterns. Same with emotions. The public will look at this person and judge personally in a second whether they are crying because of something quite serious or whether they're just bawling over nothing. Either way it's difficult to handle.

And why is it worse if it's a man than if it's a woman?

On a personal level I think it's worse because I am used to and expect men I meet to be more level-headed and logic-oriented and women to be more empathetic and emotional. It's not necessarily good to see a woman cry in public of course, but I would be less distressed if I were to see it.

Edited May 10, 2013 by Esau of Isaac

[Sunwoo]

On a personal level I think it's worse because I am used to and expect men I meet to be more level-headed and logic-oriented and women to be more empathetic and emotional. It's not necessarily good to see a woman cry in public of course, but I would be less distressed if I were to see it.

But do you not see how an attitude like this could be considered crippling to both women and men? All men do not think the same. All women do not think the same. I have at least one female friend who is far more levelheaded and logical than any of my other friends, men included. I have at least one male friend who is probably more "emotional" than what people expect from a "typical" guy. And there's nothing wrong with him.

It's not healthy to expect men in general to be more "levelheaded and logic-oriented" and women to be more "empathetic and emotional". It's shit, and it compartmentalizes people. And I know it's "society" that tells us stuff, but honestly, screw society in cases like this. If you're not comfortable with it, then fine, but there's nothing WRONG with a man who's more emotional than logical. Just because "society tells us so" doesn't mean it's right, and doesn't mean we should just go along with it like it's inarguable truth.

And again, on the women's side, how do you think a woman feels when you say that women "in general" are expected to be more empathetic and emotional? If crying is considered "weak" and "unmanly", then it has to be "womanly", and it means being weak is "womanly". Do you think we appreciate this kind of "logic"? Do you think women as a whole are "weak"? Men and women are complex, and there is NO SUCH THING as a "real man" or a "real woman".

[Esau of Isaac]

But do you not see how an attitude like this could be considered crippling to both women and men? All men do not think the same. All women do not think the same. I have at least one female friend who is far more levelheaded and logical than any of my other friends, men included. I have at least one male friend who is probably more "emotional" than what people expect from a "typical" guy. And there's nothing wrong with him.

Okay. I know a woman that's six feet tall, and a man that's barely over five. There's nothing wrong with being short, and there's nothing wrong with being tall. But both of them have difficulty dealing with people who are less an outlier than they are for obvious reasons. I suppose the analogy is not as apt given that the gender roles we fill are rather more nebulous and in large part probably tied more to culture than biology, but I wasn't stating anything as an objective fact in the first place so that shouldn't need mentioning.

People judge others in fractions of a second. Part of those judgments lie in being a stereotype, and that will never change. People create patterns to cope with reality, it's why we exist today. Is it so odd to expect even the most minor of differences between the sexes to be elevated into a social barrier of sorts?

And again, on the women's side, how do you think a woman feels when you say that women "in general" are expected to be more empathetic and emotional? If crying is considered "weak" and "unmanly", then it has to be "womanly", and it means being weak is "womanly".

Crying is generally viewed as weak whether you are male or female, at least in excess. Being weak is not being womanly, but as general rule women are expected to be more in touch with their emotions than males. Sadness and in crying are of course emotions, so women are given more leeway to display their feelings in that regard.

Do you think we appreciate this kind of "logic"? Do you think women as a whole are "weak"? Men and women are complex, and there is NO SUCH THING as a "real man" or a "real woman".

I never said there was any such thing. Stop putting words in my mouth to get offended at nothing.

Edited May 10, 2013 by Esau of Isaac

[RJWalker]

The concept of 'real' anything is stupid. Be a 'real man', 'real fan', 'real gamer', etc. You get my drift right?

Edited May 10, 2013 by Ranger Jack Walker

[Raven]

"Real Men cry to Clannad After Story."

Episode 16 every time.

[deleted35362]

I honestly don't get why anyone cries over fictional stories.

[Quick]

I honestly don't get why anyone cries over fictional stories.

I can understand why if you can relate to the story. For example: I watched the Trust and Betrayal OVA and I cried (although the crying was relatively controlled) because I could relate to the main character and I was dealing with similar struggles as well.

[Sublime Manic]

Because in most societies we are taught to deaden some emotions in public, usually to ease social interaction. It's why most people react awkwardly to such displays.

This doesn't even address the question. You're telling me why an observer expects someone not to cry - not why someone crying is expecting anything from an observer.

Because sadness is a sign of instability, at least at that moment. More, it shows that the person is possibly over-emotional. In the case of a car accident, it's common to quickly point blame. There are instances where the situation was out of drivers' hands, but people naturally look for patterns. Same with emotions. The public will look at this person and judge personally in a second whether they are crying because of something quite serious or whether they're just bawling over nothing. Either way it's difficult to handle.

Was it ever established that if someone is crying they have to be experiencing sadness? Because that obviously isn't the case. People can cry because they are moved by something particularly beautiful, or cry tears of joy as well. Further, sadness does not have to signify instability, although this definitely requires expansion for your claim to actually mean anything: what kind of instability is sadness a sign of? Emotional instability? In that case, displaying any type of emotion could signify instability, so sadness certainly shouldn't be given precedence as the signifier of weakness. Heck, overt happiness could just as easily fill that role!

On a personal level I think it's worse because I am used to and expect men I meet to be more level-headed and logic-oriented and women to be more empathetic and emotional. It's not necessarily good to see a woman cry in public of course, but I would be less distressed if I were to see it.

So it's worse because of sexist societal expectations and gender constructions? Got it. Also, you're using a false dichotomy: being more levelheaded and logic-oriented does not mean being less emotional or empathetic.

Okay. I know a woman that's six feet tall, and a man that's barely over five. There's nothing wrong with being short, and there's nothing wrong with being tall. But both of them have difficulty dealing with people who are less an outlier than they are for obvious reasons. I suppose the analogy is not as apt given that the gender roles we fill are rather more nebulous and in large part probably tied more to culture than biology, but I wasn't stating anything as an objective fact in the first place so that shouldn't need mentioning.

People judge others in fractions of a second. Part of those judgments lie in being a stereotype, and that will never change. People create patterns to cope with reality, it's why we exist today. Is it so odd to expect even the most minor of differences between the sexes to be elevated into a social barrier of sorts?

Perceptions and judgments of something do not automatically possess truth to them. You made this point about "because people will immediately judge you" in the previous post as well. Someone judging you doesn't at all mean you're weak. Someone judging you to be weak doesn't at all mean you're weak. BEING weak means you're weak. The judgment could be true and you could be weak, but you're not weak because of the judgment. The original question to which you brought up that people would judge you was "why (the bloody fuck is a man who has emotions and demonstrates them somehow 'weak'?"

"Because people will judge you to be weak" does not make that person actually weak and it doesn't actually even answer the question.

Crying is generally viewed as weak whether you are male or female, at least in excess. Being weak is not being womanly, but as general rule women are expected to be more in touch with their emotions than males. Sadness and in crying are of course emotions, so women are given more leeway to display their feelings in that regard.

Back to those gender expectations, I see.

I never said there was any such thing. Stop putting words in my mouth to get offended at nothing.

Things you have claimed:

-It is more acceptable for women to cry than for men

-crying signifies weakness

-women are expected to be more emotional, and thus cry more often

You might not have explicitly claimed women are weaker, but you've certainly implied it. A whole helluvalot of what you're saying is coming off as sexist, frankly.

[Esau of Isaac]

This doesn't even address the question. You're telling me why an observer expects someone not to cry - not why someone crying is expecting anything from an observer.

I suppose someone could come to the conclusion that if someone is crying then they are expecting something from the observer because otherwise they wouldn't cry. I know that sounds rather tautological, but from an observer's point of view it would make sense to come to that conclusion if you're not used to being around people that sincerely cry a lot.

Was it ever established that if someone is crying they have to be experiencing sadness? Because that obviously isn't the case. People can cry because they are moved by something particularly beautiful, or cry tears of joy as well.

True. I was speaking of openly weeping in sadness though. I've seen people cry tears of joy and curiously others usually join in or at least tear up to a degree.

Further, sadness does not have to signify instability, although this definitely requires expansion for your claim to actually mean anything: what kind of instability is sadness a sign of? Emotional instability? In that case, displaying any type of emotion could signify instability, so sadness certainly shouldn't be given precedence as the signifier of weakness. Heck, overt happiness could just as easily fill that role!

It could, but sadness is interpreted as a negative emotional instability while overt happiness isn't. I am sure others would feel awkward in the presence of someone that was too happy at things they shouldn't be, but I think that would be more difficult to spot than someone who is crying very easily at everything. The number of things it is acceptable to appear happy about in public is far wider than the number of things it is acceptable to openly weep about.

So it's worse because of sexist societal expectations and gender constructions? Got it. Also, you're using a false dichotomy: being more levelheaded and logic-oriented does not mean being less emotional or empathetic.

I was referring here to someone having certain characteristics that are more clearly displayed than others. I was not using a false dichotomy but explaining behavior from my experiences.

Perceptions and judgments of something do not automatically possess truth to them. You made this point about "because people will immediately judge you" in the previous post as well. Someone judging you doesn't at all mean you're weak. Someone judging you to be weak doesn't at all mean you're weak. BEING weak means you're weak. The judgment could be true and you could be weak, but you're not weak because of the judgment. The original question to which you brought up that people would judge you was "why (the bloody fuck is a man who has emotions and demonstrates them somehow 'weak'?"

"Because people will judge you to be weak" does not make that person actually weak and it doesn't actually even answer the question.

Society may not innately make you weak, but in the end it will be the judgment of society that matters to people and it can easily shape someone negatively or positively. If a child is told he is stupid from a young age to adulthood, he is far more likely to grow to be unintelligent, as compared to if he were constantly told how smart he is. If society is given the impression that someone is weak and then feeds that impression back to said someone, it can lead to a kind of negative feedback loop.

-It is more acceptable for women to cry than for men

-crying signifies weakness

-women are expected to be more emotional, and thus cry more often

You might not have explicitly claimed women are weaker, but you've certainly implied it. A whole helluvalot of what you're saying is coming off as sexist, frankly.

I have actually explicitly explained why crying does not make women weaker. I guess it's sexist, at the least very possibly. But stereotypes are part of nature, that is what I have been trying to say from the start. At least on a personal level, I like some stereotypes. I don't necessarily think some of the facets of western gender roles are bad, although I acknowledge that they can cause problems when adhered to far too closely, and as with other societal norms can be limiting to many people.

Edited May 10, 2013 by Esau of Isaac

[Rewjeo]

I honestly don't get why anyone cries over fictional stories.

Well, if the story fails to connect to you emotionally, then it fails as a story. Ergo, at least some stories ought to be cried over.

[Saint of Games]

Let me see if I understood. Isaac, you are not saying that is the way it should be, you are not even saying that is the way you like, you are saying it how it is, right?

[Blademaster!]

When I was a little kid, I saw my dad accidentally bash his head open (not really that bad an injury, just can't think of a better way to describe it atm) with his bathroom cabinet door and saw his blood go all over the bathroom. He wasn't crying after getting hurt, and as a kid, I saw that as a huge thing and thought to myself "So dad's don't cry when they get older?" and that pretty much stuck with me as I got older and noticed it became harder and harder for me to cry (I'll tear up but never really be bawing or something). The only time I can remember bawing out is when I got drunk a while ago, but I can't remember the last time I cried from getting hurt.

[Esau of Isaac]

Let me see if I understood. Isaac, you are not saying that is the way it should be, you are not even saying that is the way you like, you are saying it how it is, right?

That is correct. I am not saying that it is a definitively good thing for gender roles to be as they are, even if I personally appreciate them, but rather I am attempting to explain why they are.

[Rapier]

"Real Men cry to Clannad After Story."

I must say that Elfen Lied and Madoka Magica almost made me cry... and by that I mean, it got pretty close.

I don't believe that phrase, but I believe people should keep their heads high no matter what, even if they're emotional. I believe they should turn their grief into motivation to keep going forward and cry only when it's all over and all is said and done.

[Snowy_One]

No. I outright oppose the notion. First off, even if you believe men displaying any 'soft' emotions is wrong, what about stuff like battle-cries? Secondly, what about pride/success? If I slaughtered 10,000 men to bring my harem of women into a valley of milk and honey I can't cry in joy? I can't cry in pride when my son, Conan McMan kills his first man? Thirdly, why the hell do I have to be unemotional? Maybe I shouldn't be a wimp but being a wimp and crying are not the same thing at all. I have emotions too. I shouldn't have to bottle them up.

[Eltishan]

I don't believe men should be subject to that statement. Stoicism shouldn't be a societal standard for anyone. It causes stress from all the repression, and expectations - and it's just a completely stupid thing to ask for someone not to cry because you look weak if you do. It's okay to cry and express yourself. It's stupid to have a standard for crying in the first place.

I don't think it's just for men, though. I grew up with a father who discouraged 'soft emotion' from any of his children, and it was embarrassing to show anything other than a confident face.

[Djeets]

the word "real men don't cry" are totally for cowards since they are liars to their own life, they didn't want to be honesgt about what they are actually feeling inside (crying inside),, like gin said: "Don't use such strong words, That makes you look weak!"

which means stop acting like you are not crying or untouched in certain moments of your life, that only makes you more a liar and weak to yourself, if you wanna cry, cry..manly tears, heh...

if you didn't cry, then the other possibillities are that you didn't care a thing at all,,

[Original Alear]

I love the taste of my tears, though not as much the taste of my blood. I'm being serious too. So I don't think that crying is something bad. I think it's good. But I admit I've never licked tears off of someone else's face.

Really.

[Excellen Browning]

Yes, I cry. Over the years I've started crying less and less because of physical pain, but when in in great emotional distress I cry just fine.

And I don't think there's anything wrong with it.

[MacLovin]

I just end up laughing.

Instead of crying.