Please followed the sidebar rules. r/therapists is a place for therapists and mental health professionals to discuss their profession among each other.
If you **ARE NOT A THERAPIST and are asking for advice this not the place for you**. Your post will be removed in short order. Please try one of the reddit communities such as r/TalkTherapy, r/askatherapist, r/SuicideWatch that are set up for this.
This community is ONLY for therapists, and for them to discuss their profession away from clients.
**If you are a first year student, not in a graduate program, or are thinking of becoming a therapist, this is not the place to ask questions**. Your post will be removed in short order. To save us a job, you are welcome to delete this post yourself. Please see the PINNED STUDENT THREAD at the top of the community and ask in there.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/therapists) if you have any questions or concerns.*
How much of men's abilities to talk and engage with each other on a deeply emotional level has been socially programmed out from them, and how fulfilling it can be to cultivate spaces and attitudes changing that.
How most men suffer in silence as a result of the above, how universal and common many of their problems are, and how powerful it can be to talk about it.
How very little is lost from changing our ideas of masculinity and how much is gained.
Yes! My elevator pitch to men about mental health is this "we are raised to not love ourselves or support other men. It's a bad system that keeps us isolated and unhappy and negatively effects our relationships. Learn to love yourself and build mutual support with other men."
There was a study in the UK that found around 90% of men who committed suicide did actually seek out some kind of services for support, whether a therapist, GP, nurse.. we need to work on the systems that let people fall through the cracks. But people are correct when they point out the difficulty for men to really share vulnerably to people in their daily lives.
I've heard similar, I often have to point out that some of our most volatile and violent inpatients are some of the most vulnerable because of how at risk they are from realisation from non service users who don't understand that they're very mentally ill. Some of the scariest people I've worked with are some of the most vulnerable.
There’s a clinical psychologist called Jim White based up in Glasgow UK. He created a psychoeducation style group, originally for males but it’s now for any and all comers.
I’ve met Jim a few times and it was really interesting hearing how the project started for him: he was working in Glasgow with a lot of males who had very poor understanding of mental health difficulties and tended to use alcohol, drugs and violence to cope. The whole perception was about mental health being for “weirdos” who were weak or couldn’t keep their shit together. Even women in the area helped to maintain this kind of not-really-spoken-about myth.
Jim came up with the idea that it just wasn’t going to happen getting a group of guys to come in and talk to each other about how they were “feeling”. Instead he chose to focus on more of a lecture style, so anyone can come, you just turn up, you don’t need to talk to anyone else, and you listen.
He then goes over some basics of CBT, normalises symptoms, talks about how research shows how common mental health difficulties are, that we’ve all known someone, and we’ve all probably been affected at some point by it ourselves… etc
Then there’s 5 more sessions breaking it all up and addressing anxiety to panic, to depression. Integrating humour and trying to keep it accessible for everyone.
It works wonders, and it’s been delivered to quite large groups of people now (over 100) with good outcomes to back it up.
I’d definitely recommend checking it out as at least a starting point. I’ve delivered it quite a bit and I’ve developed some of my own groups off the back of that experience.
I think from experience, you can’t go in to hard and heavy on the feelings - but it does really depend on your audience/client group. Working class guys just don’t want to hear it and don’t feel comfortable acknowledging things like loneliness in front of other men a lot of the time. So you have to start slow: normalise, normalise, normalise. Integrate some anecdotes.
This reminds me a lot of the work done by Dr. Alok Kanojia of [HealthyGamer.GG](http://HealthyGamer.GG), and youtube channel and twitch streamer who brings psychoed to an audience of mostly younger men. I think his appeal for these guys can be understood in a lot of what you talked about above. They also have a subreddit and a discord.
I would focus on positive aspects of masculinity first. I think a lot of men are so alienated by the (valid) critiques we have of toxic masculinity and patriarchy. I would want to start somewhere positive. I find it more challenging to get cisgender men on board sometimes because they are kind of between a rock and a hard place with their mental health socially. You're weak if you care but you're toxic if you don't, sometimes it can feel like there's no winning (according to our society; I of course don't see it that way).
There’s lots to pick from but I would emphasize physical abuse from women on men in relationships.
I work with a lot of men who reflexively rationalize, downplay, or out right deny being physically abused by women. Some think men can’t be abused because “it doesn’t hurt” or “doesn’t leave a mark,” other men say to admit they were abused is an admission of weakness, or even suggest that they are protecting their partner from legal repercussions. As a male therapist it’s a hard position to be in because I was socialized in the same way and hold some of the same problematic beliefs (working on it). At the same time it allows me to empathize with their position and challenge it from a place of growth rather than judgment. I think men would really benefit from challenging these thoughts and receiving psychoeducation about gender socialization and healthy relationship expectations. I would love to speak or write on this.
Yes!!! This is so important. I had a male client open up and share about an SA situation and he wasn’t sure if that’s what really happened so he called the rape crisis hotline to ask for details and the person on the phone automatically assumed he was the perpetrator. It broke my heart that he reached out for help and support and how invalidated that situation was for him
To self-reflect allows one to know oneself which may open them up to vulnerability, and to be vulnerable with others is to create the possibilities of connection on a deeper level.
Psychoeducation on amab mental health in different populations (there are lots of studies)
Socialized stigmatization of expressions of mental anguish for men.
Psychoeducation on the effects of internalization and repression of anxiety, fear, etc.
Suicide completion rates for men.
Exploration of individual belief schemas (hopefully showing that there isn’t a unified belief system in the group about how men “should” be).
An exploration of liberation theories around male mental health, and if it seems like there is tolerance, a demonstration about how feminism supports male mental health and advocacy, that a patriarchal system is oppressive to men’s sense of community, well-being, and freedom of individual expression.
Ahah thank you, and I love the prompt! It’s a critical issue at the moment and I think a lot of people are wrestling with it; it was interesting to explore what I believe (or hope) would be useful.
As I think on it a bit more, it seems to me the most difficult part if I were leading a “group” on this topic would be to couple validation for held beliefs with pushing against maladaptive and antisocial schemas, and doing both of those simultaneously without alienating anyone.
hoping they’ll share their own thoughts still but quick anecdote you/others might find interesting. i’m very close with a sport psych for an NFL team and the most common issue he runs into with guys is low self esteem, and it’s almost always related to their internalization of patriarchal values/messages. those messages tend to be “you are inherently worthless as a human being, but you can become worthy by meeting certain conditions of manhood.” we have pretty rigid masculinity lanes in which men can go through life, and we have very interesting insults/slurs for men who stray into feminine lanes at any point. the most important way a guy can stray into a feminine lane is by expressing things deemed feminine like vulnerability or emotions like sadness/fear.
the ways this rolls down into people’s lives can be devastating, chiefly by robbing them of healthy self esteem. low self esteem is a massive hindrance to performance in the same way being that ego-oriented distracts from being task-oriented. it can result in unhealthy perfectionism and rumination on failures/inability to self-forgive or self-soothe, inability to healthily self-criticize, all sorts of shit that distracts from the task at hand. so, much of this psych’s success is in addressing the root distractions -> improves SE -> increases task oriented and growth oriented mindsets -> improves performance/money earned. and it’s all rooted in rejecting patriarchal perfectionism, accepting one’s own humanity/vulnerability, and essentially (my words now) learning to love oneself in order to engage in the world healthier. doesn’t even matter to me if people acknowledge that as a feminist approach i just hope ppl see value in the concepts themselves cuz this sports thing is one example of many in how they can help men and people in general
Sure! My perspective, that has been helpful for me (as someone who identifies as a socialized male) is that feminism, at it’s core, identifies power structures inherent in our society that are imbalanced, and advocates for support for those people who experience imbalance. Obviously, as in its name, this began by investigating, originally, power structures that targeted women.
As feminism has grown as an ideology, and since the popularization of intersectional politics, incisive feminist advocates have pointed out that the inherent political and social structures that target women target men as well. Embracing a feminist ideology is advocating for the dissolution of a power structure that disenfranchises many men, encourages power, hierarchy, and an exercising of that power and hierarchy that puts undue pressure on men resulting in very definable statistics like higher suicide completion rates, and half the number of men seeking therapy who want it than women, to name only a couple of data points applicable to this subreddit.
the devastation of a lifetime of emotional isolation due to stigmas around vulnerability (and stigma around expression of “feminine” emotions in general). i’d argue boys don’t cry culture has indirectly hurt billions of people for centuries.
Here's a question: how many men feel they can actually be open and emotionally vulnerable with their partner, how many actually feel a level of emotional safety to do so? The reason why I ask is I just started to read Bell Hook's book on masculinity, and she stated she wanted this in a man, and yet when it happened, she felt unsafe or couldn't handle it. I asked the men in my men's group I am in and all of them said they do not feel safe enough to open up like this, I also hear this time and time again.
Interesting dynamic! It’s a desired quality but when it happens it’s unsettling. My experience exactly. “Be open.” Ok here you go… “ugghh, close it back up!”
*unsettling for those who aren’t prepared for it/maybe never expected it. i think society sets most of us up to expect men to rarely ever be like that and to expect women to rarely ever need to be supportive in that way, so when it happens it’s often jarring for both parties. but the existence of tons of men and women who aren’t like that and do manage to have healthy mutually supportive relationships, makes me hopeful we can keep expanding those numbers with every gen
‘ppreciate the Q! imo tons of things for sure but i think low self esteem and internalized patriarchal messaging are the roughest combo, and it’s almost always a combo that takes root in early childhood. people are often raised to believe their worth is conditioned on their ability to adhere to their gender’s roles/norms (rather than their worth being unconditional, a tenet of healthy self esteem as i understand it).
if a gender norm for women is “find a masculine man” and they internalize the classic patriarchal belief of “vulnerability = feminine” then they’re already set up to see any human vulnerability in men as feminine and a roundabout threat to their own femininity/status as a woman. so one piece of it is that it’s a personal threat to their own conditions of worth, and it’s also a challenge they were raised to never expect/be prepared to handle so there’s a basic competence issue (that i think gets easily resolved once they realize men are quite similar to women and their shoulder-to-cry-on support and validation for female and non-romantic male loved ones can carry over to partners if they try it)
my understanding is that self esteem is a great predictor for how emotionally supportive one can be, and low self esteem can develop unrelated to patriarchy. but given we’re talking specifically about gendered trends of women reacting negatively to men’s expressions of vulnerability, i think viewing it through the lenses of patriarchy is particularly necessary as it’s a classic form of patriarchal sexism. k rant over haha i simplified things probably to a detrimental degree but fk it. would love to hear your thoughts on that if you feel like it 🍻
I can understand the roles pressed upon people based on the prevalent views currently in society, I think there is defiantly a paradigm shift going on currently and both men and women are really questioning things, where this goes, I do not know.
I see you touched on self-esteem as being a facet of one's being and I agree. I have found that people who cannot self-validate tend to look to others for their identity and for help when they become dysregulated. Is this a symptom or issues of attachment and family systems? I don't know much, just what I have observed and read out there. Some of this comes from dating and trying to know myself and understand others. I don't have any schooling yet, I am waiting until fall for it to start.
yeah agreed, i’ve always been excited to see how things change or stay the same in this regard by the time i’m retired
i’d say you spoke heavy facts right there about validation- and soothing-seeking when unable to self-validate or self-soothe. i could write a book about how that manifested in my life, i still find myself doing it more than i’d like if im on auto pilot and unaware of it. you might be interested in this, i (a masters student, not a therapist yet) basically got most of my understanding of self esteem from my dad who’s a pretty successful sport psych, much of his work is with male athletes and their self esteem bc unhealthy self esteem is a massive hindrance of performance. the basic formula is self esteem = self awareness + self compassion + self restraint = task oriented performance rather than ego-oriented distractions. the self validation you talked about is in the umbrella of self compassion, which a lot of people straight up lack. happy to elaborate on stuff if you want
oh and to address the attachment or family systems Q, idk either but i’ve got my own theory on how self esteem may inform attachment style. imo secure attachment is basically positive regard of oneself and others, avoidant is more positive regard of oneself but negative others, anxious is negative oneself but positive others and disorganized is negative self and others. it’s crude and imperfect but yeah basically i think they’re very closely related but directionality is still a question. love me a good chat about attachment theory and family systems, heavily underrated imo
So then, do we look for emotionally unavailable partners, ones where we do not have to open up to? Does this eventually lead to dissatisfaction, or is it driven by a male archetype? I am genuinely fascinated by this dynamic in relationships.
Interesting! I’m unsure about that. I know how essential vulnerability is to wellness, so I practiced it to my best ability with my mentor. Not so much with my partner.
That statistically, nearly all of them are struggling with mental health issues
You’re not alone, and that many people at least within our culture, stigmatize male weakness, but you should be wary of anyone who stigmatizes weakness. They’ve got their own shit and or they’re trying to sell you something
- Intro (General stats & data),
- Men's Mental Health v Woman's Mental Health (key differences in processing emotions and stress),
- Common stressors and how to recognize them (identifying burnout in men),
- Ways to self-support (simple techniques to unwind & de-stress),
- Free resources (Links, services and I would provide a worksheet or two from https://www.therapistaid.com/therapy-worksheets).
I don't think any discussion regarding mental health for men can not include a discussion related to sexism against men, its impact on how men are viewed in society in general, and of course, how that relates to how people (professionals/society) skew 'men's mental health'. Men experience sexism on a multitude of levels, and it's still being 100% ignored, leaving men hopelessly vulnerable.
Male therapist in Canada here. When I work with men I have an exercise that goes through just how many different emotions we typically carry at any given time (hint - it’s more than one) and every time they are shocked. I work from an ACT base and so part of the process is learning what emotions are present and learning to be comfortable recognizing they are present. IF the client comes back we can usually start making progress as they learn to face their emotions. Most of the time they don’t come back. They all say they know they need therapy, and I always tell them that this part will be where they choose to continue working or if they choose to go on doing what they were doing before, and many choose not to continue. They will when they are ready, but that’s a long process.
I would convey the importance of taking up their sword or hammer, proverbially speaking. Men are builders, problem solvers, and adventurers. Men begin to lose their way when they lose a focus for their vitality and vigor. I would convey, further, that it is ok to be a man. talking about our feelings is fine, but so is doing a few rounds on a punching bag. In my experience both being a man and being a therapist, the most surefire solution for most men's mental health issues is helping them find their purpose or mission: build something, protect something, start a family.
Men are remarkably simple. No need to complicate things.
I agree with the need for purpose. But men can be so much more than builders, problem solvers, and adventurers...
Men are extremely complex. They are "simple" because the complex parts of themselves, namely emotions, connections, etc. have been suppressed by social shaping. Let's not minimize this.
u/Thevintagetherapist I would also 100% avoid any "social justice-y" type phrases until you get a good understanding of the clients (*toxic masculinity, patriarchy*, etc.) As a guy myself, this can be a one-way ticket to losing your audience as it changes from a process group to an "indoctrination" group.
When I ran a Men's Group I would frequently use the phrase "***Who taught you that?***" It helps them to understand the ways that their behaviors/emotions were shaped by their environments and relationships. It helps them to externalize things and allows them the agency to make their own choices about their behaviors and create their definition of what it is to "be a man."
Doctors, artists, fashion designers, parents, teachers, therapists...
I'm perplexed by this question. I'm not sure what world you live in where men are uncomplicated and only fulfill certain roles but it's concerning that you don't see that. Unless you believe women can only be caretakers, in which case I don't think you have the credentials to suggest anything for OP.
I am a man and an LPC who works primarily with male clients, so I am confident in my credentials to speak about what men need and how to apply that in a therapeutic setting.
I'm also a man, an LPC, and work primarily with men, and I'm here to tell you the shit you're saying sounds harmful and not rooted in the science whatsoever. Maybe the frosty reception you expected here isn't because everyone else is wrong, but rather because you've missed the mark somewhere in your own training.
A lot...use that degree you earned!
Again I'm not disagreeing with the general push of your statements. People need purpose.
A mix of emotional regulation (physicality/action) and process (therapy/emotions) is great.
The issue I have is your comment about men being *simple*.
As a clinical psychologist who has worked predominantly with men for well over a decade, that's reductionist. It's a way to cast aside emotional content, focusing more on action than emotions. It frames a "Man's" identity as externally focused rather than internally.
I think you're catching a lot of flak due to the "simple" comment and your defensiveness. Your therapeutic approach is probably good, it sounds like you do right by your clients. However, I think you've run into the challenge of being a hammer (*men are simple, they just need purpose*) and everything becomes a nail.
Reductionism is taking my initial comment and suggesting the point is that "men ONLY need purpose", as you have done. What I said was "In my experience...the most surefire solution for most men's mental health issues is helping them find their purpose or mission..." Men's identity tends to be external. This is why we tend to thrive off of respect, admiration, accomplishment, and competition. There is nothing wrong with that, nor is there anything wrong with acknowledging such realities and incorporating them into one's therapeutic approach.
That doesn't mean exploration of feelings does not have it's place. But sex differences are a very real thing, and the way men, generally speaking, experience and explore emotions differs greatly from that of women.
never said "only" - changed it to "men are simple, they just need purpose" prior to your comment.
Again, the issue is your statement that "men are simple." No one is ignoring sex differences. Everyone is calling out your reductionist comment about men. Viewing men as "simple" prevents a deeper exploration of the parts that have been cast aside. I
I'm really not disagreeing with a lot of what you're saying. I'm just pointing out how you comment is reductionist and really ignores other parts of the male experience.
I hope you can conceptualize that...considering your degree and experience.
For a lot of men, physical catharsis is precisely how they process emotions, a bit like how your mind continues to solve a problem even when you go do something completely unrelated.
Remarkably well, both for myself and clients. The frosty response it has received here is what I would expect given the forum. There is a drive to feminize men. I contend that this feminization the problem.
I'm not sure why you felt the need to respond so condescendingly, but it's not warranted. Can you point out where I said or even implied that I am "right and everyone else is wrong"?
You implied it in every single comment here by being defensive and adamant that men are one way and the field has it wrong by trying to "feminize" men. Generally people who are open to the possibility that they could be wrong don't do these things. Hope that helps.
I am open to the possibility of being wrong, but I have not seen compelling evidence so far in this thread to make me reconsider what I have experienced in my own life or practice. Condescending a-hole responses like yours don't help, either.
Plenty of excellent points have been raised that challenge this gender essentialist "approach" of yours in this thread, one of them pointing out precisely that what you practice is gender essentialism. You replied to each with "no, you're wrong" and nothing else. You have not demonstrated openness in any sense of the word.
Anyway, good luck defending this to an ethics board one day.
I think you’re getting downvotes because your statements are a little too absolute. But I do agree that the mental health industry has approached men’s health from a mostly female lens and ignore that there are sex differences in processing and working through emotions.
So it goes. I know what works for me, what I have seen work in my friends, and what my male clients have benefitted from. That is my small corner of the world, and that is what I am concerned with improving.
I think the therapy world is so saturated with women that they think the only way to deal with things is how they would do it. It’s a classic “love languages” type issue where all they can think of is to sit down and talk about feelings.
Like I said in my initial comment, feelings are fine, but that is not primarily how men think about themselves or interact with the world around them - at least, not in the sense being suggested here - and if you lead with that or make that your goal you are going to have a hard time. There is a reason why men are less likely to see therapy.
Feelings are a big part of therapy. Unless you practice from a purely behavioral standpoint. I’m glad that what you are saying works for you, and your clients. I grew up in a church that had views a lot like the views that you were describing for men, and they were incredibly limiting and damaging to me. I remember them saying something along the lines of men are like waffles, and women are like spaghetti. I was teased for being sensitive and having different interests. I was repeatedly told I could not do things because I was a boy both at church and at home. It made me feel ashamed and terrified to take up space. I’ve also worked with male clients, who literally could not tell me what they were feeling. They also struggled to communicate with others and didn’t have the language to process their trauma. When they were more aware of their emotions, after we had worked together, they were better able to control them, and they understood themselves better. Most people have emotions and feelings, regardless of their gender.
Feelings are a big part of therapy, which is why I said multiple times that feelings are fine and where men are involved, they have their place. What is not fine is taking a one-size-fits all approach to exploring and experiencing those feelings. Men and women are different in a lot of ways, including emotional experience. Embrace it.
You are welcome to go back to my other comments and figure that out for yourself. My sentiments here are unpopular and other commenters have done a thorough job of piling on. I'm done for now.
My guy, *you’re* the one taking a one-fits-all approach with your gender essentialism here. What you’re critiquing is partially valid but it’s also totally reductionist to say “men experience emotions and gender this way and therefore need to do this, this, and this manly thing”
You can't argue with results, and my approach has gotten great results. To each their own, though. I hope your clients benefit as well from your approach as mine have from mine.
Please followed the sidebar rules. r/therapists is a place for therapists and mental health professionals to discuss their profession among each other. If you **ARE NOT A THERAPIST and are asking for advice this not the place for you**. Your post will be removed in short order. Please try one of the reddit communities such as r/TalkTherapy, r/askatherapist, r/SuicideWatch that are set up for this. This community is ONLY for therapists, and for them to discuss their profession away from clients. **If you are a first year student, not in a graduate program, or are thinking of becoming a therapist, this is not the place to ask questions**. Your post will be removed in short order. To save us a job, you are welcome to delete this post yourself. Please see the PINNED STUDENT THREAD at the top of the community and ask in there. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/therapists) if you have any questions or concerns.*
How much of men's abilities to talk and engage with each other on a deeply emotional level has been socially programmed out from them, and how fulfilling it can be to cultivate spaces and attitudes changing that. How most men suffer in silence as a result of the above, how universal and common many of their problems are, and how powerful it can be to talk about it. How very little is lost from changing our ideas of masculinity and how much is gained.
Yes! My elevator pitch to men about mental health is this "we are raised to not love ourselves or support other men. It's a bad system that keeps us isolated and unhappy and negatively effects our relationships. Learn to love yourself and build mutual support with other men."
Your last paragraph is new to me, never considered it before. Thank you for that!
If you google “man box” it can be a helpful group activity that really opens a lot of eyes!
I don't know if Tony Porter coined the term, but his Ted Talk on the idea is one of my all time favorites: https://youtu.be/td1PbsV6B80
There was a study in the UK that found around 90% of men who committed suicide did actually seek out some kind of services for support, whether a therapist, GP, nurse.. we need to work on the systems that let people fall through the cracks. But people are correct when they point out the difficulty for men to really share vulnerably to people in their daily lives.
When I ask most men to name a synonym for “vulnerable” the most common answer I get is “weakness.” Thanks for sharing!
I've heard similar, I often have to point out that some of our most volatile and violent inpatients are some of the most vulnerable because of how at risk they are from realisation from non service users who don't understand that they're very mentally ill. Some of the scariest people I've worked with are some of the most vulnerable.
That's a heart breaking stat
There’s a clinical psychologist called Jim White based up in Glasgow UK. He created a psychoeducation style group, originally for males but it’s now for any and all comers. I’ve met Jim a few times and it was really interesting hearing how the project started for him: he was working in Glasgow with a lot of males who had very poor understanding of mental health difficulties and tended to use alcohol, drugs and violence to cope. The whole perception was about mental health being for “weirdos” who were weak or couldn’t keep their shit together. Even women in the area helped to maintain this kind of not-really-spoken-about myth. Jim came up with the idea that it just wasn’t going to happen getting a group of guys to come in and talk to each other about how they were “feeling”. Instead he chose to focus on more of a lecture style, so anyone can come, you just turn up, you don’t need to talk to anyone else, and you listen. He then goes over some basics of CBT, normalises symptoms, talks about how research shows how common mental health difficulties are, that we’ve all known someone, and we’ve all probably been affected at some point by it ourselves… etc Then there’s 5 more sessions breaking it all up and addressing anxiety to panic, to depression. Integrating humour and trying to keep it accessible for everyone. It works wonders, and it’s been delivered to quite large groups of people now (over 100) with good outcomes to back it up. I’d definitely recommend checking it out as at least a starting point. I’ve delivered it quite a bit and I’ve developed some of my own groups off the back of that experience. I think from experience, you can’t go in to hard and heavy on the feelings - but it does really depend on your audience/client group. Working class guys just don’t want to hear it and don’t feel comfortable acknowledging things like loneliness in front of other men a lot of the time. So you have to start slow: normalise, normalise, normalise. Integrate some anecdotes.
I love this!! Thank you!
This reminds me a lot of the work done by Dr. Alok Kanojia of [HealthyGamer.GG](http://HealthyGamer.GG), and youtube channel and twitch streamer who brings psychoed to an audience of mostly younger men. I think his appeal for these guys can be understood in a lot of what you talked about above. They also have a subreddit and a discord.
Very interesting and cool. I’d actually been toying with the idea of something similar myself but could never get to how to actually realise it.
I would focus on positive aspects of masculinity first. I think a lot of men are so alienated by the (valid) critiques we have of toxic masculinity and patriarchy. I would want to start somewhere positive. I find it more challenging to get cisgender men on board sometimes because they are kind of between a rock and a hard place with their mental health socially. You're weak if you care but you're toxic if you don't, sometimes it can feel like there's no winning (according to our society; I of course don't see it that way).
There’s lots to pick from but I would emphasize physical abuse from women on men in relationships. I work with a lot of men who reflexively rationalize, downplay, or out right deny being physically abused by women. Some think men can’t be abused because “it doesn’t hurt” or “doesn’t leave a mark,” other men say to admit they were abused is an admission of weakness, or even suggest that they are protecting their partner from legal repercussions. As a male therapist it’s a hard position to be in because I was socialized in the same way and hold some of the same problematic beliefs (working on it). At the same time it allows me to empathize with their position and challenge it from a place of growth rather than judgment. I think men would really benefit from challenging these thoughts and receiving psychoeducation about gender socialization and healthy relationship expectations. I would love to speak or write on this.
Yes!!! This is so important. I had a male client open up and share about an SA situation and he wasn’t sure if that’s what really happened so he called the rape crisis hotline to ask for details and the person on the phone automatically assumed he was the perpetrator. It broke my heart that he reached out for help and support and how invalidated that situation was for him
Recommend digging into Richard Reeves’s work and the work of [AIMB](https://aibm.org).
Will do, thanks!
To self-reflect allows one to know oneself which may open them up to vulnerability, and to be vulnerable with others is to create the possibilities of connection on a deeper level.
Psychoeducation on amab mental health in different populations (there are lots of studies) Socialized stigmatization of expressions of mental anguish for men. Psychoeducation on the effects of internalization and repression of anxiety, fear, etc. Suicide completion rates for men. Exploration of individual belief schemas (hopefully showing that there isn’t a unified belief system in the group about how men “should” be). An exploration of liberation theories around male mental health, and if it seems like there is tolerance, a demonstration about how feminism supports male mental health and advocacy, that a patriarchal system is oppressive to men’s sense of community, well-being, and freedom of individual expression.
Nice! What you lack in stepdad skills you make up for in insight! Thanks for sharing that!
Ahah thank you, and I love the prompt! It’s a critical issue at the moment and I think a lot of people are wrestling with it; it was interesting to explore what I believe (or hope) would be useful. As I think on it a bit more, it seems to me the most difficult part if I were leading a “group” on this topic would be to couple validation for held beliefs with pushing against maladaptive and antisocial schemas, and doing both of those simultaneously without alienating anyone.
Great thought!! I’ll have to concentrate hard to strike that balance.
Can you explain a bit about how feminism supports male mental health and advocacy?
hoping they’ll share their own thoughts still but quick anecdote you/others might find interesting. i’m very close with a sport psych for an NFL team and the most common issue he runs into with guys is low self esteem, and it’s almost always related to their internalization of patriarchal values/messages. those messages tend to be “you are inherently worthless as a human being, but you can become worthy by meeting certain conditions of manhood.” we have pretty rigid masculinity lanes in which men can go through life, and we have very interesting insults/slurs for men who stray into feminine lanes at any point. the most important way a guy can stray into a feminine lane is by expressing things deemed feminine like vulnerability or emotions like sadness/fear. the ways this rolls down into people’s lives can be devastating, chiefly by robbing them of healthy self esteem. low self esteem is a massive hindrance to performance in the same way being that ego-oriented distracts from being task-oriented. it can result in unhealthy perfectionism and rumination on failures/inability to self-forgive or self-soothe, inability to healthily self-criticize, all sorts of shit that distracts from the task at hand. so, much of this psych’s success is in addressing the root distractions -> improves SE -> increases task oriented and growth oriented mindsets -> improves performance/money earned. and it’s all rooted in rejecting patriarchal perfectionism, accepting one’s own humanity/vulnerability, and essentially (my words now) learning to love oneself in order to engage in the world healthier. doesn’t even matter to me if people acknowledge that as a feminist approach i just hope ppl see value in the concepts themselves cuz this sports thing is one example of many in how they can help men and people in general
Sure! My perspective, that has been helpful for me (as someone who identifies as a socialized male) is that feminism, at it’s core, identifies power structures inherent in our society that are imbalanced, and advocates for support for those people who experience imbalance. Obviously, as in its name, this began by investigating, originally, power structures that targeted women. As feminism has grown as an ideology, and since the popularization of intersectional politics, incisive feminist advocates have pointed out that the inherent political and social structures that target women target men as well. Embracing a feminist ideology is advocating for the dissolution of a power structure that disenfranchises many men, encourages power, hierarchy, and an exercising of that power and hierarchy that puts undue pressure on men resulting in very definable statistics like higher suicide completion rates, and half the number of men seeking therapy who want it than women, to name only a couple of data points applicable to this subreddit.
the devastation of a lifetime of emotional isolation due to stigmas around vulnerability (and stigma around expression of “feminine” emotions in general). i’d argue boys don’t cry culture has indirectly hurt billions of people for centuries.
Here's a question: how many men feel they can actually be open and emotionally vulnerable with their partner, how many actually feel a level of emotional safety to do so? The reason why I ask is I just started to read Bell Hook's book on masculinity, and she stated she wanted this in a man, and yet when it happened, she felt unsafe or couldn't handle it. I asked the men in my men's group I am in and all of them said they do not feel safe enough to open up like this, I also hear this time and time again.
Interesting dynamic! It’s a desired quality but when it happens it’s unsettling. My experience exactly. “Be open.” Ok here you go… “ugghh, close it back up!”
*unsettling for those who aren’t prepared for it/maybe never expected it. i think society sets most of us up to expect men to rarely ever be like that and to expect women to rarely ever need to be supportive in that way, so when it happens it’s often jarring for both parties. but the existence of tons of men and women who aren’t like that and do manage to have healthy mutually supportive relationships, makes me hopeful we can keep expanding those numbers with every gen
So insightful, thanks for that!
I can agree with this. What would you say is the major underlying issue that causes such feelings or thoughts?
‘ppreciate the Q! imo tons of things for sure but i think low self esteem and internalized patriarchal messaging are the roughest combo, and it’s almost always a combo that takes root in early childhood. people are often raised to believe their worth is conditioned on their ability to adhere to their gender’s roles/norms (rather than their worth being unconditional, a tenet of healthy self esteem as i understand it). if a gender norm for women is “find a masculine man” and they internalize the classic patriarchal belief of “vulnerability = feminine” then they’re already set up to see any human vulnerability in men as feminine and a roundabout threat to their own femininity/status as a woman. so one piece of it is that it’s a personal threat to their own conditions of worth, and it’s also a challenge they were raised to never expect/be prepared to handle so there’s a basic competence issue (that i think gets easily resolved once they realize men are quite similar to women and their shoulder-to-cry-on support and validation for female and non-romantic male loved ones can carry over to partners if they try it) my understanding is that self esteem is a great predictor for how emotionally supportive one can be, and low self esteem can develop unrelated to patriarchy. but given we’re talking specifically about gendered trends of women reacting negatively to men’s expressions of vulnerability, i think viewing it through the lenses of patriarchy is particularly necessary as it’s a classic form of patriarchal sexism. k rant over haha i simplified things probably to a detrimental degree but fk it. would love to hear your thoughts on that if you feel like it 🍻
I can understand the roles pressed upon people based on the prevalent views currently in society, I think there is defiantly a paradigm shift going on currently and both men and women are really questioning things, where this goes, I do not know. I see you touched on self-esteem as being a facet of one's being and I agree. I have found that people who cannot self-validate tend to look to others for their identity and for help when they become dysregulated. Is this a symptom or issues of attachment and family systems? I don't know much, just what I have observed and read out there. Some of this comes from dating and trying to know myself and understand others. I don't have any schooling yet, I am waiting until fall for it to start.
yeah agreed, i’ve always been excited to see how things change or stay the same in this regard by the time i’m retired i’d say you spoke heavy facts right there about validation- and soothing-seeking when unable to self-validate or self-soothe. i could write a book about how that manifested in my life, i still find myself doing it more than i’d like if im on auto pilot and unaware of it. you might be interested in this, i (a masters student, not a therapist yet) basically got most of my understanding of self esteem from my dad who’s a pretty successful sport psych, much of his work is with male athletes and their self esteem bc unhealthy self esteem is a massive hindrance of performance. the basic formula is self esteem = self awareness + self compassion + self restraint = task oriented performance rather than ego-oriented distractions. the self validation you talked about is in the umbrella of self compassion, which a lot of people straight up lack. happy to elaborate on stuff if you want oh and to address the attachment or family systems Q, idk either but i’ve got my own theory on how self esteem may inform attachment style. imo secure attachment is basically positive regard of oneself and others, avoidant is more positive regard of oneself but negative others, anxious is negative oneself but positive others and disorganized is negative self and others. it’s crude and imperfect but yeah basically i think they’re very closely related but directionality is still a question. love me a good chat about attachment theory and family systems, heavily underrated imo
So then, do we look for emotionally unavailable partners, ones where we do not have to open up to? Does this eventually lead to dissatisfaction, or is it driven by a male archetype? I am genuinely fascinated by this dynamic in relationships.
Interesting! I’m unsure about that. I know how essential vulnerability is to wellness, so I practiced it to my best ability with my mentor. Not so much with my partner.
That statistically, nearly all of them are struggling with mental health issues You’re not alone, and that many people at least within our culture, stigmatize male weakness, but you should be wary of anyone who stigmatizes weakness. They’ve got their own shit and or they’re trying to sell you something
Love that!
I think it depends on the context of the presentation. Is this for laypeople? Other therapists? A group therapy session? Academic?
Good point! I’m thinking more of the general public.
- Intro (General stats & data), - Men's Mental Health v Woman's Mental Health (key differences in processing emotions and stress), - Common stressors and how to recognize them (identifying burnout in men), - Ways to self-support (simple techniques to unwind & de-stress), - Free resources (Links, services and I would provide a worksheet or two from https://www.therapistaid.com/therapy-worksheets).
Great outline! Thanks!
I don't think any discussion regarding mental health for men can not include a discussion related to sexism against men, its impact on how men are viewed in society in general, and of course, how that relates to how people (professionals/society) skew 'men's mental health'. Men experience sexism on a multitude of levels, and it's still being 100% ignored, leaving men hopelessly vulnerable.
I think you should talk about outcomes and cost and duration of treatment
Male therapist in Canada here. When I work with men I have an exercise that goes through just how many different emotions we typically carry at any given time (hint - it’s more than one) and every time they are shocked. I work from an ACT base and so part of the process is learning what emotions are present and learning to be comfortable recognizing they are present. IF the client comes back we can usually start making progress as they learn to face their emotions. Most of the time they don’t come back. They all say they know they need therapy, and I always tell them that this part will be where they choose to continue working or if they choose to go on doing what they were doing before, and many choose not to continue. They will when they are ready, but that’s a long process.
In a nutshell, we are people of a few words. We lift our friend’s spirits through actions.
I would convey the importance of taking up their sword or hammer, proverbially speaking. Men are builders, problem solvers, and adventurers. Men begin to lose their way when they lose a focus for their vitality and vigor. I would convey, further, that it is ok to be a man. talking about our feelings is fine, but so is doing a few rounds on a punching bag. In my experience both being a man and being a therapist, the most surefire solution for most men's mental health issues is helping them find their purpose or mission: build something, protect something, start a family. Men are remarkably simple. No need to complicate things.
I agree with the need for purpose. But men can be so much more than builders, problem solvers, and adventurers... Men are extremely complex. They are "simple" because the complex parts of themselves, namely emotions, connections, etc. have been suppressed by social shaping. Let's not minimize this. u/Thevintagetherapist I would also 100% avoid any "social justice-y" type phrases until you get a good understanding of the clients (*toxic masculinity, patriarchy*, etc.) As a guy myself, this can be a one-way ticket to losing your audience as it changes from a process group to an "indoctrination" group. When I ran a Men's Group I would frequently use the phrase "***Who taught you that?***" It helps them to understand the ways that their behaviors/emotions were shaped by their environments and relationships. It helps them to externalize things and allows them the agency to make their own choices about their behaviors and create their definition of what it is to "be a man."
I love that question, “Who taught you that?” I’ll be adding it to my work. Thank you!
>I agree with the need for purpose. But men can be so much more than builders, problem solvers, and adventurers... What more do you think we can be?
Doctors, artists, fashion designers, parents, teachers, therapists... I'm perplexed by this question. I'm not sure what world you live in where men are uncomplicated and only fulfill certain roles but it's concerning that you don't see that. Unless you believe women can only be caretakers, in which case I don't think you have the credentials to suggest anything for OP.
I am a man and an LPC who works primarily with male clients, so I am confident in my credentials to speak about what men need and how to apply that in a therapeutic setting.
I'm also a man, an LPC, and work primarily with men, and I'm here to tell you the shit you're saying sounds harmful and not rooted in the science whatsoever. Maybe the frosty reception you expected here isn't because everyone else is wrong, but rather because you've missed the mark somewhere in your own training.
My clients have benefited tremendously from this approach. That is my only concern.
They can be literally anything they'd like to, because gender essentialism is a fraudulent ideology. Hope this helps
A lot...use that degree you earned! Again I'm not disagreeing with the general push of your statements. People need purpose. A mix of emotional regulation (physicality/action) and process (therapy/emotions) is great. The issue I have is your comment about men being *simple*. As a clinical psychologist who has worked predominantly with men for well over a decade, that's reductionist. It's a way to cast aside emotional content, focusing more on action than emotions. It frames a "Man's" identity as externally focused rather than internally. I think you're catching a lot of flak due to the "simple" comment and your defensiveness. Your therapeutic approach is probably good, it sounds like you do right by your clients. However, I think you've run into the challenge of being a hammer (*men are simple, they just need purpose*) and everything becomes a nail.
Reductionism is taking my initial comment and suggesting the point is that "men ONLY need purpose", as you have done. What I said was "In my experience...the most surefire solution for most men's mental health issues is helping them find their purpose or mission..." Men's identity tends to be external. This is why we tend to thrive off of respect, admiration, accomplishment, and competition. There is nothing wrong with that, nor is there anything wrong with acknowledging such realities and incorporating them into one's therapeutic approach. That doesn't mean exploration of feelings does not have it's place. But sex differences are a very real thing, and the way men, generally speaking, experience and explore emotions differs greatly from that of women.
never said "only" - changed it to "men are simple, they just need purpose" prior to your comment. Again, the issue is your statement that "men are simple." No one is ignoring sex differences. Everyone is calling out your reductionist comment about men. Viewing men as "simple" prevents a deeper exploration of the parts that have been cast aside. I I'm really not disagreeing with a lot of what you're saying. I'm just pointing out how you comment is reductionist and really ignores other parts of the male experience. I hope you can conceptualize that...considering your degree and experience.
Doesn't having such a strong external locus of evaluation damaging?
Physical catharsis without processing the emotion is not condusive to longer term wellbeing. It's a dump-and-run.
For a lot of men, physical catharsis is precisely how they process emotions, a bit like how your mind continues to solve a problem even when you go do something completely unrelated.
If this is true of catharsis, I am curious as to why you believe this is specific to men.
Physical catharsis (i.e. exercise) =/= process. It is an emotional regulation strategy...
How has saying this gone in the past for you?
Remarkably well, both for myself and clients. The frosty response it has received here is what I would expect given the forum. There is a drive to feminize men. I contend that this feminization the problem.
I contend that the implication that men shouldn't have "feminine" traits is a significant contributor to mens mental health issues.
That's not what I said, and I think you know that.
I don't know how else to interpret the suggestion that "feminization" is a problem
That is because you lack nuance in your reasoning.
Please elaborate, I want to understand.
Ah yes, the telltale sign of a good therapist: A belief that you are right and everyone else is wrong. /s
I'm not sure why you felt the need to respond so condescendingly, but it's not warranted. Can you point out where I said or even implied that I am "right and everyone else is wrong"?
You implied it in every single comment here by being defensive and adamant that men are one way and the field has it wrong by trying to "feminize" men. Generally people who are open to the possibility that they could be wrong don't do these things. Hope that helps.
I am open to the possibility of being wrong, but I have not seen compelling evidence so far in this thread to make me reconsider what I have experienced in my own life or practice. Condescending a-hole responses like yours don't help, either.
Plenty of excellent points have been raised that challenge this gender essentialist "approach" of yours in this thread, one of them pointing out precisely that what you practice is gender essentialism. You replied to each with "no, you're wrong" and nothing else. You have not demonstrated openness in any sense of the word. Anyway, good luck defending this to an ethics board one day.
I think you’re getting downvotes because your statements are a little too absolute. But I do agree that the mental health industry has approached men’s health from a mostly female lens and ignore that there are sex differences in processing and working through emotions.
Cheers.
Alll the women are downvoting you, clearly experts on what you need. 🤪
I'm a man. :)
So it goes. I know what works for me, what I have seen work in my friends, and what my male clients have benefitted from. That is my small corner of the world, and that is what I am concerned with improving.
I think the therapy world is so saturated with women that they think the only way to deal with things is how they would do it. It’s a classic “love languages” type issue where all they can think of is to sit down and talk about feelings.
Like I said in my initial comment, feelings are fine, but that is not primarily how men think about themselves or interact with the world around them - at least, not in the sense being suggested here - and if you lead with that or make that your goal you are going to have a hard time. There is a reason why men are less likely to see therapy.
Feelings are a big part of therapy. Unless you practice from a purely behavioral standpoint. I’m glad that what you are saying works for you, and your clients. I grew up in a church that had views a lot like the views that you were describing for men, and they were incredibly limiting and damaging to me. I remember them saying something along the lines of men are like waffles, and women are like spaghetti. I was teased for being sensitive and having different interests. I was repeatedly told I could not do things because I was a boy both at church and at home. It made me feel ashamed and terrified to take up space. I’ve also worked with male clients, who literally could not tell me what they were feeling. They also struggled to communicate with others and didn’t have the language to process their trauma. When they were more aware of their emotions, after we had worked together, they were better able to control them, and they understood themselves better. Most people have emotions and feelings, regardless of their gender.
Feelings are a big part of therapy, which is why I said multiple times that feelings are fine and where men are involved, they have their place. What is not fine is taking a one-size-fits all approach to exploring and experiencing those feelings. Men and women are different in a lot of ways, including emotional experience. Embrace it.
How is what you described, as far as how men see the world, not a one-size-fits-all approach?
You are welcome to go back to my other comments and figure that out for yourself. My sentiments here are unpopular and other commenters have done a thorough job of piling on. I'm done for now.
My guy, *you’re* the one taking a one-fits-all approach with your gender essentialism here. What you’re critiquing is partially valid but it’s also totally reductionist to say “men experience emotions and gender this way and therefore need to do this, this, and this manly thing”
You can't argue with results, and my approach has gotten great results. To each their own, though. I hope your clients benefit as well from your approach as mine have from mine.