Could you expand on this argument more? My first reaction was negative ("Why would the world be worse if more people felt safe sharing their feelings??") so I would like to hear more and challenge my assumptions.
For my part, I'll point to research that suppressing emotions increases risk of suicide[1] and that many more men die from suicide than women[2]. I'm willing to hear out an argument that the world would be worse if these tragic deaths hadn't happened but it requires extraordinary evidence and argumentation IMO.
I'm not advocating for either side here, just want to explore my ideas for a bit.
During some rough patches of my life, I found solace in being vulnerable with my friends and speaking about how I felt.
At other times, taking a more stoic approach worked wonders. Learning to notice feelings and emotions without them leading you into a spiral of debilitating self-pity or self-loathing, for me, is the ultimate life skill. And to be honest, I only could really progress with such a skill in relative solitude.
The way I have it now, the approach of reaching out for help with mental space is more like going to a doctor. There's a certain threshold of suffering that needs to be reached, for you to take deliberate actions. Practising mindfulness and all the stoic narratives is more like doing fitness. It helps with the ongoing, everyday, low-key pain, as well as prepares you for the bigger issues in the future.
As someone who spends most of his life and work focused on more openly expressing how I feel and wanting others to do the same, I'm curious to explore the other side as well.
I think one of the largest conflicts that I've encountered with this work is that a lot of culture, philosophy, religion, etc., seems to advocate for more emotional suppression. That the goal is to detach and have a quiet, steady, peaceful existence, absent of conflict, but also absent of too much connection.
And if those groups advocate for more suppression, to start to express more can create some deep conflict and possibility of ostracism or excommunication. For example, many people consider it to be an emotional affair if you say how you honestly feel to someone who is not your exclusive romantic partner. Many families consider it the ultimate betrayal to share family secrets with those outside the family. Etc.
So when I think of more men doing it, I worry that if not all men did, then culture could have that strong clash. Maybe we already have it. Some advocating to open up more, to be more aware of how we're feeling, and some advocating to go in the opposite direction.
I would love to talk about this more and I worry this post is already long enough for now :-)
from my personal reflections, it's hard to distinguish sharing feelings and simply complaining and becoming more and more negative in nature
sharing simply amplified the negative content within, it's like there is a negative thread in my hand, the more you share and put it into words the more you are following that thread going into a state where you shouldn't be
same goes for complaining how the life is unfair
and when it came to positive feelings, it seemed much better to do "little things" than sharing the feelings
(Since we're discussing counterfactuals and could-have-beens)
In a macabre way, maybe suicidal ideation due to suppressed emotions is nature's way of managing male populations? What if men stopped killing themselves because they felt safe sharing their feelings? What if that led to testosterone fueled "musth" rages where men started to go on rampages just to let off steam? That world would be worse for everyone involved.
I don't think that to be the case testosterone fuelled raging is an effect of suppressed emotions. Imo sharing of feelings would lead to more soft, feminine personalities which is the direction we are slowly heading towards.
Emotional suppression isn't the same as not sharing your feelings, per the linked article.
I don't think the world would be worse if men started sharing their feelings, but I do believe there are societal factors that force men into stoicism, and that it's not feasible for change to start with men alone.
I guess that depends whether they do it on the way up or on the way down w.r.t. productivity. If people offed themselves before they became a burden on others that might be a positive for society.
It's not so much the folks who suck it up and carry on, though they might be doing themselves a long-term disservice; it's the ones who project it outwards that are doing most of the harm in the world. Boys and girls, of course.
What if it turned out to be a world much worse than what we have? There is perhaps some evolutionary advantage to people that suck it up and carry on?