I often see posts from the LGBT community that make me feel... Envious? Almost like I'm missing out on something. The social stigma of being "gay" for having feelings must've really gotten to me growing up. I feel there's a blockage in my brain and emotions that tells me I can't be a silly, goofy, caring guy, so I default to being quiet and closed off. Almost like my true potential as a person is being surpressed by the thoughts of myself and the beliefs of those around me.

I've thought about it, and I know I'm not gay, but as you describe in your post, there is some kind of societal disapproval around men having deeper emotions that I see in almost everyone around me, especially in myself. My dad and brother never vent, complain, cry, etc. They just wake up, go to work, and distract themselves the rest of the day. I can't remember the last time I had a deep conversation with somebody other than my wife (we fortunately don't have a "traditional" relationship in the sense of this post and can be vulnerable with each other). The last 2 times I've tried to communicate real issues with my dad, I've written real, detailed letters, which went completely ignored, twice.

I completely see what you're getting at. Traditional gender roles DO seem to make love impossible, and the hyper-masculine(?) somehow make an exception to reproduce. At least that would explain why I was born, but my family has shown little care for the mental health or wellbeing of myself or others. It's almost like the societal pressure to get married and have children override the actual feelings of love for others.

I was fortunate that my family let me be scared and vulnerable and didn't ridicule my feelings. My folks were supportive and helped me through a lot of tough times.

That blew up in my face when I started dating. Had some bad experiences opening up with the best being a look of disbelief and a slow cooling leading to breakup while the worst was a laugh in the face who then went out to cheat on me with some rando.

It was a long time before I figured out that I wasn't the problem and found a partner that let me confess my issues and was loving and supportive. Oddly enough, before her, most of my support network were my fellow sailors who actually let me be vulnerable.

I think part of the issue is hypermasculinity and the focus on zero weakness is a relatively new thing. I'm not saying the idea that men are tough and that people being ostracized for not fitting the mold is new, but in recent years there is certainly a higher importance placed by conservatives on staying in your lane in political and online discourse that can trap young people into thinking there's no wiggle room. But go back to the years they see as the golden years (good luck getting them to pin that down or why they were golden btw). I don't know. 40s maybe? Nazis love ww2 stuff. Watch movies or listen to songs from then. It's all about how women make men feel light and gay (happy back then). They feel twitterpated. They swoon. Those are all words for feeling soft and fuzzy. Cishet men put themselves out there to women they felt lovey about and got rejected sometimes. The letters they wrote in wars are about how they miss the tenderness of their partners. Relationships are the respite from the horrirs of war. Not the other way around. Modern conservatives are lying that men were pimps and that women are only attracted to power. Some women are, but a good lot of them were probably raised in that mess too and think they have to do it that way.

In any culture where some part of human nature or experience isn't accepted, it does not of course go away. A thing will not be expressed directly, however it will sometimes be expressed indirectly or have to be read more subtly. People may pretend that this is not going on and that the unaccepted thing is not there, but it is still there.

Most importantly, love requires both partners to be emotionally vulnerable, right? So then under gender roles, men can't love women, only objectify them? Wouldn't this make society one giant trauma factory where men are traumatized into detached sociopathy and women are traumatized into servitude?

Yup, basically

So what the hell are conservatives doing in relationships? Are they all loveless relationships

I think that whilst there are some conservative men who "cheat" and allow themselves moments of escaping from their gender roles, there are a lot of miserable people. Like, have you ever noticed how conservative media is just constant ragebait, and makes people just get angry at how shit the world is, then it will make them feel scared and powerless, but then because they don't have the emotional capacity to explore those emotions, they channel it more into rage. I think that you're right on the money when you describe claiming power under the patriarchy as being a "Faustian bargain".

Although you probably feel like you're socially delayed because you're not just now working through all this stuff, speaking as someone who's 29, I have known plenty of people who didn't reach this realisation until they were a fair bit older than you, so from my perspective, you're probably ahead of your peers. Some people may seem like they don't need to work on this stuff, but often it's just that it's less easy to detect until it really becomes an issue later in life. What you discuss is why I vehemently consider it to be an aspect of my duty as a feminist to work to understand how the patriarchy harms men, and restricts masculinity in general.

If you want to explore this more, a book that I would hugely recommend is "The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity and Love" by bell hooks. It's an incredible book, and I think we'd live in a far healthier world if every man read this book. It's old enough that you can find it for free on Archive.org

Most importantly, love requires both partners to be emotionally vulnerable, right? So then under gender roles, men can't love women, only objectify them? Wouldn't this make society one giant trauma factory where men are traumatized into detached sociopathy and women are traumatized into servitude?

Yep.

So what the hell are conservatives doing in relationships?

Exactly what you just said.

Are they all loveless relationships, or did all of the men cheat their gender role to develop romantic feelings?

A little column A, a little column B

If men didn't cheat a little in the past decades where gender roles were the strongest, shouldn't we see a kind of generational trauma so severe that violent crime is rampant and secure attachment is very scarce?

*Looks around at the state of the world...* Yeah, sounds about right.

(Most of that violent crime is in the form of unreported domestic violence, and that lack of secure attachment is masked by relationships held together by obligation.)

Glibness aside, you're 100% correct, and the reason you're struggling is because oh boy is it hard to be slapped in the face by this realization all in one go.

Is love possible under rigorously enforced traditional gender roles? Yes, of a sort, but it will never be healthy. It will never be truly free and alive.

But when we say "traditional gender roles", do note how I added the "rigorously enforced" there. Breaking out of the conservative mold does not require you to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

I work in IT, I dress, look and act very masculine, I have a basement full of power tools, I know more than anyone should about guns, I play violent video games, I have a dog, I like to fire up the smoker on a Sunday and cook some ribs... There are plenty of ways that I fit the ideal of traditional male gender roles. And there are plenty of ways that I don't. I could talk about the small ones, but the most significant would be that I'm bisexual, and I'm married to a woman who is in the army. And not, like, a clerk or something, she's infantry. Could kick my ass ten times over, and I'm very comfortable with that.

The thing about traditional ideas of gender is that once you understand that they're bullshit, you're no longer required to accept the bad with the good. You get to pick and choose what you want from the buffet. My wife is one of the toughest motherfuckers you will ever meet, and a lot of her interests skew more "manly". She likes military history, she's a gun nerd, she plays shooters and complicated strategy games. But she still likes to dress up pretty and put on makeup, and she still likes to curl up in my arms and be the little spoon. I can cry at sad movies, but I can also be the tall, strong man who will wrap her up in his arms when she's sad or stressed.

It's not an either/or. It's a whatever you want. Be the person you are most comfortable being, whatever that may. Because the best part is, when you are your most genuine self, people will be drawn to that. There is nothing, nothing more attractive than someone who truly knows who they are and gives zero fucks what anyone else thinks. The more you shed the rules that were imposed upon you, and the rules you imposed upon yourself, the more you grow into a version of you that makes you happy, the more people will be drawn to that. Don't worry about trying to be someone else's ideal. Be your own ideal. The rest will happen naturally.

So, how do you actually be vulnerable as a man? Asking for a friend

I relate to a lot of what you wrote. I'm a man who is very introverted and very shy. I'd say I feel a deep pathological need to express vulnerability. I'm sexually submissive and I like expressing my feminine side as well. Being the less desirable male, my shyness sure hasn't done me any favors. Just be yourself, masculinity and/or femininity can be what ever you want it to be. Besides, they're ain't nothing manliar than being yourself.

You're deconstructing all this at 23, you're a champ. That's young to have so much perspective on the failings of your upbringing. Really, mad props. I have nothing to add, let your worldview shift to something more sane, more in tune with your intuition. Be manly and vulnerable ! ❤️

Your problem is the "traditional gender roles". Traditions are crap because they don't evolve. You aren't traditional. Don't look for traditional.

Historian here: People "back then" had the same brains we have, were as smart as we are and also were capable of feeling the same emotions as we are. And they totally were able to love. History is full of really awesome love stories. Letters of Note is a great resource to start exploring those emotions. They also have a book simply collecting love letters and you really might want to get this. The onslaught of love from historical people writing to each others will answer your question if men could have loved women back then. Just take a look at this letter of Richard Feynman writing to his dead wife and all the love and caring oozing out of it:

https://news.lettersofnote.com/p/i-love-my-wife-my-wife-is-dead

Those "traditional gender roles" the conservatives are pushing are not real. They were not real back then and are a power fantasy of bad people. There were gay people back then. And trans people. And men and women loved each others. Others were in loveless or abusive relationships. Go and read a few of those letters. They are awesome.

I reject the premise of your question

The idea of "traditional gender roles" is bullshit, and the thought that men are not "allowed" to be vulnerable is absurd

I'm not afraid to cry. I tell my friends that I love them. I have two teenage sons that I kiss goodnight, every single day. I am a disability support worker. I do regular mental health checks on family and friends because I know what it is to be depressed, and how one person caring can be the difference between living and dying. I hug... A lot. I am 49 years old and I am male...

... Therefore, I must be gay. Please don't tell my wife.

There's a lemmy resident who made a video about this. He talked about the role men's emotional deadness is shaped to play in relationships and how under this system we're supposed to seek out women to experience our emotions through vicariously. Like, they experience beauty and sadness and joy and we just experience... them.

It's fucked up. It explained so much about why people in my life hated my emotions and what me showing them implied. Men and women deserve better than to be made to exist like that.

Vulnerability is not a weakness. It's the opposite. It shows you have the courage to open up to people.

Love does not require vulnerability in any shared sense. It can absolutely exist without it. I would argue that a relationship isn't very healthy without some concept of shared vulnerability but love isn't a relationship and a relationship isn't love.

Many relationships are purely based on a concept of "I know what my partner is thinking/feeling" when nothing is shared. There are many connections that just work, for various reasons.

I'm nearing 50 and didn't even know what vulnerability actually was (I had a concept but not an experience. I didn't know what I didn't know) until my early 40's. And I'm still shit at vulnerability and have roughly as much experience with using a Bat'leth in combat as I do being vulnerable. But believe me, I've been in love many times.

So then under gender roles, men can't love women, only objectify them? Wouldn't this make society one giant trauma factory where men are traumatized into detached sociopathy and women are traumatized into servitude?

Yes

Are they all loveless relationships, or did all of the men cheat their gender role to develop romantic feelings?

It's not either/or, some people do one, the other, or both. Not everyone gets into a relationship, either.

You're only 23, though, you don't need to have all your shit figured out already, and you definitely don't need to understand everything about love and patriarchy all at once either.

Love is just a set of needs that another person meets for you. Sometimes those needs are deep and meaningful and let you be vulnerable and feel like someone really knows you and... sometimes it's just chemicals, comfort and staving off loneliness. Both can be love, both are pretty great, it's cheeseburgers vs fancy steak.