Top products from r/MensLib

We found 27 product mentions on r/MensLib. We ranked the 132 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Top comments that mention products on r/MensLib:

u/JustinJSrisuk · 3 pointsr/MensLib

I do! I was born into a family that owned a Thai restaurant, which I took over from age 18 to 27, and I’ve also a total whore for Asian cuisine so I can definitely help with soy sauce suggestions!

So here’s a great tip: you should have at least two different kinds of soy sauce including a light soy sauce and a dark one, with perhaps two or three additional kinds of specialty soy-based seasoning sauces. While that sounds like a lot, generally soy sauce is an inexpensive ingredient, even for more high-quality brands, and a bottle will last you for ages. I’ll give you a few recommendations for each category. As a side note these are Amazon links, but if you have access to an Asian grocery store then I absolutely suggest buying them there instead as you would save at least 50% off the prices.

Light Soy Sauce: this is your workaday soy sauce, the kind you would add savory saltiness to stir-fries or dip your sushi in.

Pearl River Bridge Golden Label Superior Light Soy Sauce - is a great standby favorite of Asian chefs the world over, especially in the seafood palaces of Hong Kong. It’s less jarringly salty than say a Kikkoman, with more complexity. Pearl River Bridge is a really well-respected brand of Asian condiments, generally all of their products will be either good to excellent. Note that they produce two different varieties of light soy sauce, the “Superior” and the “Golden Label” - always go for the Golden Label, it’s just better in every way than the “Superior”.

The second light soy sauce I’d recommend is San-J Tamari - which is made wholly of soybeans without any wheat. While this is good news for anyone with gluten sensitivity issues, the flavor has a more pronounced umami because of it.

Dark Soy Sauce: think of dark soy sauce as a soy balsamic vinegar - it’s a highly-concentrated, almost syrupy sauce that also has a bit of sugar for a hint of sweetness. It is ideal for marinades, salad dressings, glazes, I’ve even used it in desserts!

[Pearl River Bridge Mushroom Flavored Superior Dark Soy Sauce](16.9 oz. - is an umami bomb to your tastebuds, rich with portobello mushroom notes and a perfect accompaniment to red meat dishes like wok-seared ribeye with gai lan aka Chinese broccoli.

Healthy Boy Thai Sweet Soy Sauce White Label - as thick as molasses, this sweet soy is essential in traditional Thai noodle dishes like ผัดซีอิ้ว (pad see iew) and is also good when you want to add a little savoriness to sweet recipes. I once made sweet soy brownies with a healthy dollop of this and they were utterly fantastic.

Miscellaneous Soy Sauces: these are usually different varieties of flavored soy sauces from around Asia.

SHIMOUSA PONZU - ponzu is a mixture of soy sauce and yuzu, which is the juice of a Japanese citrus fruit. This bright sauce adds a lemony kick to salad dressings and jazzes up seafood. Try it as a marinade for salmon crudo or as a dipping sauce for your favorite sashimi.

Golden Mountain Seasoning Sauce - oh my god do I love this stuff, it tastes like my childhood as my Dad would always cook my favorite meal (pineapple fried rice with shrimp, chicken, veggies and cashews) with this sauce. It’s a soy sauce with a very distinctive tangy kick, and I use it in everything from fried rices, eggs, soups, noodles, stir-frys, you name it. Everyone I have sample this wonderful sauce ends up being addicted!

I skipped over a lot of stuff, like the recent rise in artisanal soy sauces, many of which are even aged in barrels! But I think that this is a good start for someone who wants to explore beyond the disposable packets they get from the takeaway place. Let me know if you have any more questions! (Or if you want a recommendation for fish sauces, because I could literally write monographs on the subject!)

u/Fishgottaswim78 · 1 pointr/MensLib

> I don't know how to engage in that process without being pushy?

That's a fine line you sort out by practice. We all struggle through that and it's just a matter of having good intentions and paying attention to the person you're with.

> But I never could open myself to trying to regain attraction from the other when it was lost, because I felt kind of manipulative, like a pua

I think ultimately there's a difference between playing mind games and just being open and fighting for what you want in a relationship. i've had men i've been dating break up with me because X, and, when i've disagreed or really wanted the relationship to continue, I've said so and tried to keep it happening. Ultimately you can try to get the other person to see a different point of view, but you're never going to make someone change their minds if their minds are made up. The difference between being upfront about what you want and being a PUA is that PUA's make you believe like women can be controlled and can be made to be with you, which is very different from telling someone you think a relationship is worth fighting for and being in.

> I feel that my sexual desires are more reliable than womens'?

yeah! cuz you're you! I can't ell you how many times i've been attracted to a guy who seemed attracted to me and then completely disappeared! sometimes before we even had sex! you cannot control other people...the moment you realize that fact and accept that that's not what dating is even about, it gets a lot easier.

because then it's about:

  • "i'm into you, are you into me? no? cool, NEXT!"
  • or about "i thought you were into me, are you not anymore? no? cool, thanks for the good times, NEXT!"

    instead of about:

  • "pleaaaaaaaseee we liked each other that one time we're the only two people left on the planet likeeee meeeeeeee" or

  • "she treats me like shit but i reaaaaaaalllyyy like her why won't she treat me nice? I better stay here 4 years and make her Change"

    > contextualizing female sexuality

    you're confusing two things though. Liking someone and wanting to fuck them are two completely different things. The way people like each other has nothing to do with gender, it's just that women are who you want to date and they seem elusive to you so you think there's a difference. Women also crush on men who are not interested in them for months/forever. I crushed on one dude who barely even looked at me for almost TEN YEARS (it never went anywhere).

    female sexuality, when she likes to fuck? That's definitely more contextual, and there are plenty of scientific evidence to confirm that. That's not necessarily a bad thing. If you're interested in learning more about female sexuality, you should check out Come As You Are. Also I think one of Cordelia Fine's books, like Testosterone Rex, would be interesting. Both authors have gone on various podcasts to talk about their work, so that's another way to get the gist if you're interested but don't have the time.

    But ultimately the way to think about female sexuality is this: it's not yours to control, it's not yours to predict, and just because a woman wants to fuck you now doesn't mean she wants to fuck you later BUT ALSO just because she doesn't want to fuck you now, doesn't mean she doesn't want to fuck you later either. i turn my partner down for sex all the time (he does to me too, but that generally gets talked about less) and it has everything to do with my mood, how sexy i feel, and what i have to do later in the day and absolutely nothing to do with how much i love him. he knows no means no, but he also knows he can ask again later and the answer might be something completely different because whether i want to have sex or not has everything to do with whether i feel like it.

u/puppy_and_puppy · 7 pointsr/MensLib

I'm not sure if this would work or not, but I would try redirecting people who have conservative or right-wing leaning views at least toward better thinkers than Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson and toward optimistic views of the future of society, to cull some of the us-vs-them and zero-sum thinking that plagues these discussions.

Sometimes it feels like men, especially, feel existentially threatened by other modes of thought, so being at least sympathetic to the good bits of their ideas and offering something similar but that promotes openness and liberal ideas may help.

Hans Rosling's Factfulness presents a pretty optimistic view of the world. It's all getting better! Seriously!

Jonathan Haidt (and Greg Lukianoff for the first book)

u/PM_me_goat_gifs · 28 pointsr/MensLib

Do you happen to have pointers to resources which fathers can use to teach this?

Heck, does /r/MensLib have any pointers to recommended dating advice? The Resources for Men Guide in the sidebar has some tips for building healthy boundaries and communication in a relationship, but not yet anything on how to start dating. Should it? What would people recommend?

Would anything I linked to in my 9-comment attempt at giving someone advice be useful? (I'd be interested in feedback on what this community thinks of any piece of my advice)


EDIT: the resources I linked to as being probably-helpful were

u/rverne8 · 1 pointr/MensLib

The Guardian has a good article that gives a good overview of who Peterson is. Be sure to follow the links towards the end of that piece for some good round outs on the social context.

How dangerous is Jordan B Peterson, the rightwing professor who 'hit a hornets' nest'?

Basically he espouses the biological essentialism of sexuality and gendered behavior and denies completely that gender is a social construct. Not sure he even has any real use for the word gender itself as that word is best left off with: human sexuality is really nothing more than sex role identity issues; women would be best off mothering and men are best using their talents when they build bridges and leave the nuturing of kids to the women.

I see Peterson offering the decantation of old spirits into new vessels; he teaches men to involve themselves into more toxic masculinity and assures us that will make men feel better about themselves.

The subject of gender role and the conflicts that causes for both men and women have never really been dealt with adequately for the average person. You have to be really scholarly inclined to get much out of the psychological literature-at least that's my finding. Popular Psychology tries, but the publisher there won't allow writers more than 1200 words on a given date and that's inadequate to cover the topic.

The Gendered Society is the best source that I've found so far for getting an angle on gender psychology and is the most approachable monograph I've read. Well written and actually a joy to read while remaining deeply informative. I highly recommend it; he deconstructs Peterson, who was not around when his edition (2011) was written, by criticizing gender essentialism.

u/TheBobopedic · 63 pointsr/MensLib

Hey! Congrats on taking action for yourself! Even making a post is doing that!

Try using [this] ( tool to browse for therapists near you. put in your zip code, a mile distance, and other issues to start.

While i'm more on the anxiety disorder side of things and less the mood disorder side like yourself, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is generally useful for many basic issues if you use it correctly, just try to stay away from Psychoanalysis if you can.

A book I would definitely reccomend is [Feeling Good] ( by David Burns. It does sound self helpy and gimmicky, but it's not. It introduces you to the basics of CBT, cognitive distortions and evidence collecting excercises that you can do on your own or with help from a therapist.

Just know that MANY more people than you think deal with mental health issues. It's something like [1 in 5 in the U.S] ( It's my dream that within my lifetime we can see mental health hygiene policies be implemented by institutions and organizations throughout the country with the same depth and totality that toilets and handwashing were in the early 20th century.

Good luck! You aren't alone!

u/Mr_Holmes · 2 pointsr/MensLib

I found this article and interview to be very interesting. Paul Raeburn has written books on many different science topics in the past. He became interested in the science of fatherhood and how important it is to a child's development. He said he was already "biased in favor of fathers already" but that even he was surprised to see just how important fathers are according to the science out there.

This article also contains an interview in another tab, so be sure to check that out too (though the interview is redundant in some places, still worth the read). Here is a link to his book. I will definitely be giving it a read.

u/Sabuleon · 5 pointsr/MensLib

To be fair, our sex drive is regulated (if that's the right word?) or managed differently, if I recall correctly the most prevalent theory these days is spontaneous desire (most common in men) versus responsive desire (most common in women). It's like 2 cars with the same amount of gas (the sex drive), both can have the gas pedal floored but if one has the brakes on, it won't go as far as the other. Women tend to pile on the brakes more easily.

/r/deadbedrooms has a surprising amount of info on the topic specifically because they deal with those differences on a daily basis (I got redirected there to read a lot).

Google has a lot to say about the theory and if you're interested in something more concrete, check out "Come As You Are"

I'm still not convinced that these more subtle differences aren't attributable to biology though.

u/the253monster · 1 pointr/MensLib

History of Sexuality by Michel Foucault is REALLY good. Michel Foucault is great for if you want to study the concepts behind intersectionality and gender before a lot of the big dialogue started around those (he wrote mostly in the 50s, 60s, and 70s). Also The Invention of Heterosexuality by Jonathan Ned Katz is great.

u/Le4chanFTW · 7 pointsr/MensLib

I couldn't find any when my wife was expecting. I looked, but everything that turned up online or even in the store was all written with the premise that the father-to-be is some beer-guzzling knuckledragger. I wound up buying this book in the end, and it's actually really helpful for almost everything you can think of.

Apparently there is this one and a sequel book that look promising.

u/Licensedpterodactyl · 13 pointsr/MensLib

We received The Expectant Father as a gift when we were expecting our first. I’ll be honest, I don’t remember what was in the book, but I do remember the reassuring feeling I had when I read it.

So... it’s probably down the alley of what you’re looking for

u/Aetole · 9 pointsr/MensLib

Also, American masculinity specifically rejected a lot of older masculine norms that weren't quite as toxic (showing affection, being physically intimate/touching, wearing pretty clothes, etc). Michael Kimmel's Manhood in America is an excellent resource on these shifts as American men wanted to define themselves counter to European "foppish" men. Think Teddy Roosevelt's Rough Riders and the general escape from domesticity (women's sphere) to squat around campfires and be rugged and dirty, as well as rejections of higher class masculinity (with wigs and lace and high heels).

u/ILikeNeurons · 5 pointsr/MensLib

> research on how to make a proper apology

This is really key.

Here is a good place to start. And probably you'd want to have a therapist's feedback before pulling the trigger.

u/Macedonian_Pelikan · 8 pointsr/MensLib

If he's big on reading, I absolutely adore The Dangerous Book for Boys. It has a tremendous amount of amazing things to do and read about. It's not aimed at combatting toxic masculinity, but it presents itself as a work for boys in a very non-toxic way.

u/codemuncher · 8 pointsr/MensLib

I taught myself CBT from a book that cost $6.79: and meditation, well there's a lot of internet resources that are cheap or free.

As a commenter posted below, most social services are offered at a state or county level. Local politics is a lot easier to change than you'd think. If you're upset at how your local state is doing, perhaps you should do something about that?

Because, if you're trying to sell that we ought to redirect funding from childrens programs, well, you know that is a futile fight.

u/MarcusKilgannon · 31 pointsr/MensLib

I found this was a great book to challenge that mindset. It helped me a lot anyway.

u/double-happiness · 1 pointr/MensLib

Just since we're talking about this sort of stuff, and you seem to know a lot about it, have you ever read this? If so, any views on it?

u/JP_AMA · 235 pointsr/MensLib

I see that you are a young man with an inquiring mind! I go into the five aspects of chaos in my book available for order here, as well as the 17 reasons why only tryhards choose Tau.

u/jdp-redit · 6 pointsr/MensLib

> you sound well intentioned, but a bit naive,

How so exactly?

> It's almost like you're coming from a social justice warrior perspective. My vantage is from the medical industry.

I am defiantly not a SJW, unless you consider anyone who saw an obvious problem with their society and advocated change a SJW.

> Male circumcision had it's place. It helped to avoid a variety of medical and hygienic concerns.

[Routine] Male circumcision never had a place in competently practiced medicine especially concerning "hygiene". It's true that those were excuses to justify the practice but that's all they were, excuses based on shoddy research and myths. To be sure, there are some cases where a circumcision can be categorized as a necessary medical procedure but those are few and far between and almost never occur in infancy or childhood.

> I wouldn't call our society enlightened by any means, but we definitely posses the awareness and technology, across all socioeconomic classes to see that male circumcision is no longer needed and comes with it's own risks.

Part of the reason why I said allegedly. I agree in part, we poses the awareness now that male circumcision is not only no longer needed, it never was needed. Further, those few reasons where it may have been needed in the past have been further reduced. Yet it's still being performed on roughly 50% of new born boys in North America, a clearly unnecessary surgery being imposed on more than a quarter the population, does that not seem wrong to you?

> Now it's a matter of educating the general public, making it known that snipping the tip off baby boy is not A) needed B) devoid of risk, and actually has risk and complications of it's own. This should be done by your OB, or PCP, not by protestors.

There is a role for everybody. And I'd agree that this would be the ideal way, in fact that's how the practice got turned around in England (early 50s), New Zealand (60s), Australia (70-80s), and Canada (80s-Present). The problem here is that OBs and PCP (particularly in the US) are not willing to handle this situation. I have spoken with more than I can count and very few actively dissuade parents from the practice, even when they know it's unnecessary and harmful; even when they themselves would not do it to their children.

> Further the talk about these practices being done are because parents want to control their kids sexuality, is complete bullshit.

Not in the current day, but this was the primary reason the practice gained popularity in the English speaking world. I think you should check out

  • Robert Darby, A Surgical Temptation: The Demonization of the Foreskin and the Rise of Circumcision in Britain (Chicago University Press, 2005)

  • Leonard Glick, Marked in your Flesh: Circumcision from Ancient Judea to Modern America (Oxford University Press, 2005).

    Both authors, with well documented research, show beyond any reasonable doubt that one of the primary motivation for circumcision through the early part of the 20th century was to curb and discourage masturbation in boys and young men. The reasons have clearly shifted since then and continue to shift even to this day.

    > Male babies are circumcised by health care providers, not Rabbis; Christian faith based hospitals don't refuse the procedure - it's just an out dated medical procedure.

    No, religious personnel certainly perform circumcisions, typically a mohel. In some cases, like in NYC, they're even having problems with these mohels spreading oral herpes by the practice of metzitzah b’peh. Interestingly, in some places some Christians have even sought out these men instead of having it done in a hospital.

    > Now, female GM is a whole different story, different ball park, even. I've heard lots of horror stories of cultures doing these type of practices to control sexual behavior and desires of wives and children.

    Those who perform FGM believe that it make women cleaner, more hygienic, they'll get fewer diseases, more pleasing to their spouse, ect, ect. The bottom line is they believe that it's is an important and necessary procedure. Not unlike those who support MGM.

    > I would say the level of intervention here should again be done by doctors (if present in that culture or social circle), or with governmental oversight, regulation, and enforcement. That shit should be illegal.

    I agree, I just think boys should be given equal protection. I think both practices are fucked up and all that shit should be illegal. What I don't get (and I know you don't support MGM) is why you don't think boys deserve the same protection as girls.

    > The cosmetic stuff, well thats on the individual. If a chick thinks her outter labia are "gross" and wants them removed, or if a dude want's his cock to be sans turtle neck, they have the right, at least in developed nations, to go and pay for that elective procedure.

    I agree, I don't care what an adult does to themselves.

    > None of these things, save for my last example of the cosmetic stuff have a thing to do with equality[.]

    I disagree.

    > they are all vastly different,

    Which type of FGM? Is a pin prick drawing a drop of blood more invasive than a typical MGM? It's not but it's illegal. So why should we prevent parents from doing something to their girls that is objectively less harmful and not protect boys? Please explain that to me because you seemed to be overlooking the question. You would get no argument from me that some forms of FGM are worse than MGM but that isn't universally true.

    > and done for different reasons,

    I'd disagree, the two practices are done for very similar reasons, the parents, within the constructs of the society that they live in, feel that it's best for their child. In both cases they're nearly always wrong.

    > with different results.

    I think that depends, I've seen plenty of example and spoken with plenty of men whose circumcision cause more damage than was expected. The circumcision season in South Africa has claimed at least 40 lives so far and we're no where near done. A month or two ago news from Canada leaked out about an infant who died during the procedure. Also from Canada one doctor was fined a paltry 20K for botching 31 procedures.

    I am sorry, I just can't look at stuff like that and say "it's different."

    > Thinking everything needs to be equal counter productive. Because equality and fairness is just a concept, it's not a reality.

    Total equality may not be reality but we should at least strive for that.

u/raziphel · 0 pointsr/MensLib

I don't know what other post you're talking about. be more specific with your "you", please.

> Historical examples:

You're asking a lot here and it's not easy to condense. You do understand that this is not something that can easily be quantified as an example without producing books of literature, right? I'll do what I can, but you will need to be understanding here, because some of these are less direct, but examine the historical and social environments that allow this behavior to flourish. You also must look at how women have been treated throughout history, which is reflected even today (as second-class citizens, if not just property). Context is important, after all, and a lot of these examples also point to the problem I mentioned. This also involves rape culture... which I expect you to hand-wavingly dismiss.

Well to start The History of rape. Too many things to quote there, but you'll just have to read the article.

Victim blaming.

Sexual objectification

"women submit to your husbands" link, for one. Notably that the bible (whether you agree with it or not) is the base for a great deal of our society and law.

Look at the pushback regarding women's suffrage and the messages they contain.

Laws against women (international)

historical US laws against women

A list of books on gender roles that will likely give you what you want (but I doubt you'll actually read them).

Sexual coercion history, calloused sexual beliefs and judgments of sexual coercion in a date rape analogue.

What Does 'Sexual Coercion' Say About A Society?

If you want to look at the Quran for guidance, how about you look at actual facts also: for example Rape in Saudi Arabia, where women are punished more harshly than men, or laws regarding rape victims and Honor Killings, specifically in regard to rape victims. What do those things say about their societies?

Natural history of rape

Rape culture and Spirituality

Rape culture and victim-blaming

Marital rape which frankly, isn't even a crime in some places.

Partner rape

Why women who are sexually assaulted remain silent

Keeping women in their place

Rape culture

More about rape culture

Being Silenced: The Impact of Negative Social Reactions on the Disclosure of Rape

Sexual coercion.

One of the telling points is that things like the previous links exist because this is a significant problem. Recent examinations of this problem do not mean the problem no longer exists, or didn't exist, in the past. These things don't just appear ex nihilo.

TLDR: women are encouraged to not report, and when they do, they're punished for it by society (legally and otherwise). Even when they fight back, they're still demonized. They are told that what happened either "wasn't rape" or was "their fault."


Now, if you want actual examples of this in action (instead of links, research, studies, etc. that point to it), you'll have to look at some very detestable stuff, like this, but frankly, I don't want to search too far into that shit.

u/[deleted] · 27 pointsr/MensLib

Disclaimer: I am not a hapa. I am not going to speak for them, but it is very nuanced. What I am about to type is a little personal. I think I have reached a state of clarity without breaking down or believing in pseudo theories like RedPill. Please bear with me because I WILL make generalizations, cite anecdata. Let's go.

History of East Asian immigration dates back to the 1800s. Asians are not recent immigrants, yet are treated so. These stereotypes hence have a history. Asian laborer immigrants dating white women was revolting to American culture. Specific miscegenation laws were put into place. For instance:

> In the mid 1850s, 70 to 150 Chinese were living in New York City and 11 of them married Irish women. In 1906 the New York Times (6 August) reported that 300 white women (Irish American) were married to Chinese men in New York, with many more cohabited. In 1900, based on Liang research, of the 120,000 men in more than 20 Chinese communities in the United States, he estimated that one out of every twenty Chinese men (Cantonese) was married to a white woman. In the 1960s census showed 3500 Chinese men married to white women and 2900 Chinese women married to white men.

> Due to gender bias in immigration policy and hiring practices, of the 30,000 Filipino laborers following the cycle of seasonal farm work, only 1 in 14 were women. Unable to meet Filipinas, Filipino farm workers sought the companionship of women outside their own ethnic community, which further aggravated mounting racial discord

>Anti-miscegenation laws discouraging marriages between Whites and non-Whites were affecting Asian immigrants and their spouses from the late 17th to early 20th century. By 1910, 28 states prohibited certain forms of interracial marriage. Eight states including Arizona, California, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Texas, and Utah extended their prohibitions to include people of Asian descent

The emasculation of Asian men follows the same pattern. It's historic. Not a recent pop cultural trend. It's not funny, or just Oscar jokes. It's racial identity politics at its core. Since in a patriarchal system, emasculation implied cultural submission, that route was preferred. Parallels can be drawn between slavery in the US or emasculation of Indian men by the British imperialists.

>This isn’t edgy humor. It’s tired — so tired, in fact, that its origins can be traced all the way to the mid-1800s. To counteract the massive wave of imported cheap Chinese labor (“coolies”), Asian men were subject to a series of targeted laws that systematically stripped them of rights that signified manhood, such as property ownership, job opportunities and the ability to marry freely. The legislation worked hand-in-hand with the campaign on the cultural front, warning men and women of the Yellow Peril and peppering newspapers with caricatures that clearly showed these coolies as less than regular men. (MTV News' webseries Decoded has a good — and educating — rundown of this history.)

>This is where the "tiny Asian penis" jokes on our talk shows, playgrounds and Oscar stages come from. It’s the legacy of deliberate discrimination in our country’s history, just as the hypersexualization of black men has its damaging roots in slavery. These crude reputations aren't harmless. Without even getting into the more life-threatening ramifications of sexual stereotyping, there's ample statistical and anecdotal evidence that black and Asian men take a hit in the dating pool because of perception bias. (So do black women, which is one reason why Viola Davis has repeatedly celebrated her How to Get Away With Murder protagonist's sexual desirability and prowess.)

Now South Asian men have a different history. We are recent immigrants to the US. 2nd or 3rd generation mostly. Our emasculation started when the British women in India started engaging in relationships with local women. This is where the "Indian men are rapists" propaganda started. Don't believe me? Here:

>At the time, British newspapers had printed various apparently eyewitness accounts of English women and girls being raped by Indian rebels, with little corroboration to support these accounts. It was later found that some of these accounts were false stories and a few created to paint the native people of India as savages who needed to be civilised by British colonialists, a mission sometimes known as "The White Man's Burden". One such account published by The Times, regarding an incident where 48 English girls as young as 10–14 had been raped by Indian rebels in Delhi, was criticised as false propaganda by Karl Marx, who pointed out that the story was written by a clergyman in Bangalore, far from the events of the rebellion. These stereotypes and allegations were later argued as false by scholars, but they did harden the British attitude to the Indian population.


Here's a colonial era art piece in my hometown:

Ashis Nandy's "the intimate enemy" ( provides a pretty good outlook of colonial emasculation. Although it's a psychoanalysis of the Indian psyche and the lingering effects of colonial oppression it does touch some cultural aspects.

Status Quo:

  • This website curates a list of movies/tv shows that shows Asian/Indian people as sexually inferior.
  • We also had discussions about this on the American Born Indians sub now and then: >
  • Specific subreddits were formed for Asian men looking for help. This was interesting because three years ago talking about this instantly made me a "bitter misogynist". Today the discussions are way more nuanced. Some subreddits: /r/AsianMasculinity , /r/aznidentity , /r/asianbros. Although the main sub /r/asianamerican have strictly banned discussions about Asian masculinity, the topic is only gaining more attention.
  • r/hapas is a subreddit for people born out of white-asian marriages. A lot of users there have Asian mothers who are less than kind towards Asian men. These kids grow up with low self esteem because they are half asian and their own mothers reject their masculinity. It's a very complex situation.
  • Asian feminists like Amy Tan, have constantly criticized Asian men/Asian patriarchy while embracing white male patriarchy. For instance here is Esther Ku mocking Asian penises. Her diatribe against Asian men is apparently a reparation for what happened centuries ago before her ancestors immigrated. Oh she also was happy that the Asian doctor got beat up by the UA staff. (,
  • When Elliot Rodgers (white dad, asian mom) went on a killing spree, Asian feminists didn't waste a moment before jumping the bandwagon to criticize "Asian male". Nevermind the fact that his first victims were Asian men. Nevermind the fact that he was strongly influenced by American notion of manhood or that his father is white or that he is as white as he is asian if not more. (, This was the most coldblooded thing in my opinion. Rather than empathizing with the ASIAN MALE victims the kneejerk response was to blame Asian men. Later, following criticism from all sides, they budged and wrote non-apologetic "think pieces". Oh they also started fight against "toxic asian masculinity" in a country were Asian men are barely considered men.

  • When Indian men finally started getting treated like normal men on TV. Not the emasculated loser who LITERALLY cannot talk to women (Thanks Raj Koothrapalli), Indian feminists couldn't stand it. (,, Nevermind the fact that Mindy Kaling exclusively dated white men in her show, or in The Office she dumped Senthil for a white guy or the fact that Mira Nair and Jhumpa Lahiri has worked real hard to systematically destroy Gogol's masculinity in "Namesake". Suddenly they want to dictate brown men's dating lives. Or the several dozen shows were brown men are sidelined or sometimes totally emasculated. ( Nevermind that Priyanka Chopra, Deepika Padukone, both Indian artists are paired with White men.

    Let that sink in.

  • The only group I can thank genuinely are black women. While there definitely are subsets of black women that would not consider us as "real men", they were the only group to call out these stereotypes and racism. From random forums to feminist blogs.

    (I am sleep deprived and above word limit. I am fully aware that this is incoherent. I will continue this if there is interest AND I'm not embarrassed since this is an icky topic)