To Be Sad, Bad, and a Boy
Max Himpe:
If you asked people on campus for their definition of a sadboi (correct spelling), I guarantee you’d be hard-pressed to find a clear-cut definition. In fact, I did just that and the answers were pretty diverse. Some of the most common responses included: men in touch with their emotions; men suffering from mental health problems; men who manipulatively make women perform one-way emotional labour to satisfy their needs; and “What is that?” The second-to-last definition was the most common and the most damning.
None of these ways of being a sadboi should be taken lightly. Mental health, emotional labour and emotional intelligence are some serious buzzwords to describe modern men. Granted, sadboi is casual Yale slang and I am by no means on a quest to make this world a more serious place. But we currently have one casual word with no equivalent to describe three utterly different male types. I’m worried that good sadbois (emotionally sensitive men) are being conflated with bad sadbois (emotionally manipulative men). I don’t want to discourage bros from blubbering. If masculinity is in crisis, we need to love men who are in touch with their emotions, not pigeonhole them with shitty men who abuse emotional trust.
I want a word to call out men who make women do emotional labour. But I also want a different word to celebrate men who are okay with not being okay. And I want a word for men who are experiencing mental illness. One word simply won’t do the job.
So, with that, I propose making some new words. Let’s broaden the definition of men who emote. That’s right, it’s time to do some lexicography (ooh, yeah).
Amanda Thomas:
Sadboi is no longer an effective term. It’s been diluted to the point where I’m really not sure what the distinct qualities of a sadboi are. I think sadbois listen to a lot of Frank Ocean and are not in touch with their emotions. I propose that someone creates a comprehensive checklist for sadbois, like they do for psychopaths.
Maybe the difference between sadbois and emotionally sensitive men is that sadbois rely on other people (mainly women) as therapists, whereas emotionally sensitive men want to have two-sided conversations where they can actually get to the root of the problem. I cannot understand why a man would willingly identify as a sadboi. The lettering of the word itself is so childish it feels like an obvious parody.
So I don’t think men who healthily emote are walking around calling themselves sadbois or should fear being called a sadboi? Have you ever been called a sadboi?
Side note: what about all the sadgirls!!! Are there even any sadgirls? I think it says a lot about our society that we don’t talk about sadgirls. Are women just perfect and refuse to use their emotions in order to manipulate men?
Max Himpe:
Perhaps I’m wrong about people’s interpretations of sadboi; I could just be a man with a UK visa and a poor grasp on American jargon. Fortunately, no one has called me a sadboi yet — at least not to my face; reveal yourself, cowards! Nonetheless, we should find a word to commend expressive bros that don’t burden women. Tearjerks, maybe? Or Cry-ptonites?
Coinage aside, Amanda has now got me contemplating sadgals. Men — especially straight men — usually struggle to get it up around me (“it” being emotional honesty), probably because I am a man, too. But there are always people who treat friends and strangers like therapists. Lord knows I’ve stood in a club smoking area getting dumped on by a rando’s bout of emotional diarrhoea. And, yes, some of these randos happen to be women. They belong to a breed of “sadpeople,” a group that often intersects with “Mitski fans.”
In some contexts, I don’t mind emotional dumpers. Go ahead and spill your woes, whims and worries onto my anonymous lap if you so wish. People live juicy lives and I am always keen for a taste. In other contexts, though, I do mind. When a friend demands my ears and nothing else for a whole hour; when I’m emotionally strained and my empathy levels have reached “sociopathic”; when I’m never asked about how I’m doing, then the relationship becomes unsustainable.
Of course, I am not placed in the position of doing as much emotional labor as women. So take everything that I say with a pinch of man salt. But, Amanda, what do you think it says about society that we don’t identify sadgals? Is it absurd (or very male) that I enjoy an occasional emotional dump from others? Do you think sadgals, if they exist, do dump more on men than women? Damn, Teatime is hot this week.
Amanda Thomas:
“Sadgals” is a much better term and I’m honestly hurt I didn’t come up with it first. Yeah, I guess I’m saying that there are way fewer sadgals than sadbois. Maybe any person who uses their emotions via a sob story to manipulate a person into spending time with them, having sex with them, or dating them is a sadgal/sadboi. Maybe the binary doesn’t exist. There’s only sadpeeps. This is my thesis and conspiracy as follows:
The reason why we don’t talk about sadgals is because women are, for the most part, taught how to deal with their emotions and can have honest, emotional conversations with themselves from a very young age. Therefore, the women that are emotionally toxic and manipulative do not get as much attention because who’s going to call them out? Sadbois who have no idea what emotional abuse is?
The more I type the sadder I get. I think it just speaks to how we need to start encouraging everyone to have healthy conversations about mental and emotional health so that we don’t have a bunch of sadpeeps running around. I’m sorry sadbois, you’re not cool, and as a society we need to start calling out all the sadgals too before they start ruining people’s lives. The Tea is piping this week!
