A group known as the "League of Tears" is growing and gaining speed. Their aim; to encourage men to cry....at almost ANYTHING.
I understand that there are times for men to cry (every man has his own rules for when and why) but this group is too much. They actually believe that becaue a man doesn't cry he is disassociated from his emotions. That his community is less because he doesn't cry. They encourage men to sit in circles as a group amd just cry...to weap, to sniffle, and to need tissues.

This is too much.

Views: 871

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I don't cry easily,  I never liked to let people know that the got to me...I am a minister and I have seen a lot of people Die ..done a lot of funerals.  Someone has to maintain and take care of business if you would.  There is a time to Cry and a time not too..I am in touch with my "INNER CHILD" He dosen't cry either...Suck it up and die of a stroke like a man...I'm kidding probably... there is a time and place for everything.

What is the opposite of "strength in numbers"?  Never underestimate the pitifulness of pathetic men in large groups, I suppose.  Then again -- this leaves less competition for men with the gift of backbone.

 

JB 

Very, very well spoken Jack

What is the opposite of "strength in numbers"?

 

Weakness en masse?

Good one and very true Margie, kudos
Hahahaha, i like it!

Ah the pendulum  is swinging the other way.  First we must be stoic, now we must be weepy.

Sounds like another way to find a stress release so some sort.  Some go running, I suppose, some now weep.

 

Now to say that I'm not healthy if I don't sit and have a good weep as my chosen form of stress release would be poor.  

 

 

 

 

 

I agree that men do cry.  I have cried (really cried) many, many tears in my life.  I have also cried inside myself many more times.  I believe that crying is an excellent outlet for stressfulemotion, grief and sorrow.   I believe that our society as a whole would probably be better off if we allowed men to cry more often and more publicly.  That said I do not believe that getting together in some prearranged group to prractice crying is neither realistic nor appropriate.  Do we not already have enough real troubles over which to cry without making a mockery out of sadness?  This is not unlike hiring professional mourners, as some cultures have done - and gotten some very great performances no doubt.  But those people are acting.  Like Actors.  Playing a role.  Do we need to play at grief?   Do we really?
I agree with my Good friend Kermit some folks can cry on Cue...it is put on for their benefit.
Well said!

I think that's something that makes me very old-fashioned : I believe that, as a man, you're not supposed to show your emotions, period. You have to be there in times of depression to help people around you, and that's why you have to be the strong one. I think you should cry in private and that's it.

 

I understand what they mean by being emotionally disconnected, and I agree with it to a certain extent. I think not crying, and choosing to not show your emotions builds a fence inside you, and in the end, you're less connected to your own emotions -not disconnected completely, but less . But is it really a bad thing ? Do we want men that are very emotional all the time ?

Exactly.  That's why some men seem as expressionless as a stone: because men have to, at times, be a stone that does not get shoved around by any emotion.  Imagine if all the American pioneers just sat down and cried any trial happened.  We would be a nation of crybabies waiting for our stronger enemies to conquer us.

RSS

Latest Activity

Sir replied to Jesse Dean's discussion What Would You Do?
"Counselors have a huge impact?  Like most of us here, I went through high school.  I would have called the impact "too small to notice." It sounds like you aren't sure where to stop with joking.  If so, you can always…"
29 minutes ago
Shane replied to Pale Horse's discussion They Who Shall Not Be Named in the group The Great Debate
"Yeah. I had a better pic of him entering the rally, but I can't find it now. Here's the key note speaker at the white supremacist rally in Boston the 40,000 peaceloving people showed up to protest. https://youtu.be/q9X2ZRB9GCU"
49 minutes ago
Nick H replied to Pale Horse's discussion They Who Shall Not Be Named in the group The Great Debate
"What is he wearing? Israeli flag?"
5 hours ago
Jesse Dean posted a discussion

What Would You Do?

Let's say you're a freshman in high school. On your first day, you meet up with your counselor for the first time with some other kids with the same counselor. You do some ice breakers and you learn a little bit about each other. Suddenly, you notice a Nebraska Cornhuskers lanyard that your counselor is wearing and since you are a complete idiot and from Colorado, you strongly condemn the Nebraska team (and it is warranted because, many Nebraska fans are extremely annoying, and because you are…See More
7 hours ago
Pale Horse replied to Pale Horse's discussion They Who Shall Not Be Named in the group The Great Debate
8 hours ago
Shane replied to Pale Horse's discussion They Who Shall Not Be Named in the group The Great Debate
"I can't even draw decent stick figures."
9 hours ago
Pale Horse replied to Pale Horse's discussion They Who Shall Not Be Named in the group The Great Debate
"Are you secretly Scott Adams? That ties in with his take on "violent rhetoric.""
10 hours ago
Shane replied to Pale Horse's discussion They Who Shall Not Be Named in the group The Great Debate
"Yeah. It's funny because stormweenies call him a "kike puppet"."
10 hours ago

© 2017   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service