This is what I don’t get about the manosphere movement.
Young guys watch these influencers being abrasive macho dorks, talking exactly like this. They somehow combine that “dorky, petty semantic minutia” argument style with being aggressively condescending and being a macho jerk, all at once. I’m a pretty isolated guy, yet it’s amazing how grating it is to me.
And men watching these influencers conclude that… other people will appreciate that?
Because the other side tells you that you suck and your problems are not real.
If you are a boy and you look around one side blaming you for all of societies ills and the other simply is not what aide are you going to gravitate to?
So there are two sides. Everyone in the world falls into one these sides. And all of one side got together and came up with a new set of words. These words they demand everyone use and each has built into them explanations that men are bad.
Can you point to evidence that supports this theory? If it was half of the people I assume there are some large communities these words are heard often but I’ve never heard them.
Things are already equal. Toxic masculinity comes from toxic femininity. Toxic femininity comes from toxic masculinity. It’s been like that forever, but we raised the living standard enough so now we can argue about this with our excess spare time.
Also, it is another way of divide and conquer to make sure that we keep fighting each other and not the billionaire class who needs to be defeated if you want to have a world in 20 years from now.
The quantum head fuck Is that men and women have always been equal in a weird way and at the same time equality can never be achieved because giving birth was given to one of the two sexes and not the other.
When it comes to class warfare, equality can be achieved.
Because while intelligence and skill and talent may not be equally distributed, the right to live is.
Send me the link that proves that decades feminism has had tangible impact on policy in Western society in data.
You can’t. Because they are not a well funded lobby group and this is a capitalist system you’re trying to change.
Yes, that argument makes anyone who makes it sound like an incel, but that doesn’t mean that’s the case, nor does it invalidate the argument.
We have the sea rising by nearly 5cm per decade now, we blew straight through 1.5° and the President of the biggest military in the world is and actual pedophile.
On the other side men can become women and vice versa without being thrown into a lake to see if they drown or publicly burnt.
I think focusing on climate change and not having the biggest pedophile coverup in human history succeed is a much higher priority.
Teach sons to be good, teach daughters about the sons who aren’t. Help female coworkers negotiate the same salary as men. But then maybe move on to the sons and daughters to be safe, and actually have a future.
The downvotes ratio tell me that the “off with their head” human hive psychology is still working and that’s the primary weapon the oligarchs use to stay in control.
I’m not ignorant, I’m making a point to broaden the perspective, and a few people believed that I’m claiming that “women make enough money now” or “pay inequality is no longer an issue” or “violence against women is not disproportionately larger than with men”.
The problems with deciding things are “equal-ish” have already been well addressed, so I just want to point out - just because the billionaire class might use a topic as a wedge issue against us doesn’t excuse us from working to fix it.
They might be setting fire to houses as a distraction, but the houses are still on fire. The people inside can’t wait for us to find and deal with whoever hired the arsonists.
People seek confirmation that their negative traits are positive ones. Why put in effort to win, when you can just get an echo chamber to explain to you that you already won because of XYZ reason.
This isn’t limited to the manosphere stuff but it certainly is a big part of it. Any group that uses that other people are full of shit though as evidence that they are the good guys is also trying to pull the same trick.
There is value in feminisim because women’s rights are “new” and that is to say that there are people alive who grew up in a time where women’s rights were considered a joke. Women received the ability to have their own bank account without a man co signing in 1974. That means MOST Gen X people, when they were born, their mothers were not legally allowed to have a bank account. That isn’t ancient history like some folks like to act it is.
So… look, I hate having to pick at something that I generally agree with, but it wasn’t illegal for women to have bank accounts or credit cards or whatever prior to 1974. It just became illegal to discriminate against women for bank accounts as of the 1974 law.
I get that it’s a subtle distinction, but the reason it is important is because there are those who would think that as long as the government isn’t actively oppressing a group, then it’s doing fine (“it was illegal for women to have bank accounts, now it’s not. Job’s done!”), as opposed to recognizing that it is people who oppress others and it is the government’s job (like it was in 1974) to prevent it.
Banks (most, anyway) did not allow women to have bank accounts or lines of credit. And they’d do it again (or some other discriminatory bullshit) without government regulation.
There is value in feminisim because women’s rights are “new” and that is to say that there are people alive who grew up in a time where women’s rights were considered a joke.
I’d like to remind everyone that men’s rights are new too. For example, in the UK, women got rights to vote in 1928. Men got it in 1918, a whole 10 years earlier.
Most of the population was (and continues to be) under the boot of the wealthy, their rights immaterial.
they also watch those “pickup artists” how to “science behind tricking women into dating you”, they picked alot of thier terminology to, which is the alpha/beta crap, shit tests,etc. so they are probably also dissecting womans behaviour, “if they dont like me they automatically a bitch or a slut that is looking for someone more attractive”
This is what I don’t get about the manosphere movement.
Young guys watch these influencers being abrasive macho dorks, talking exactly like this. They somehow combine that “dorky, petty semantic minutia” argument style with being aggressively condescending and being a macho jerk, all at once. I’m a pretty isolated guy, yet it’s amazing how grating it is to me.
And men watching these influencers conclude that… other people will appreciate that?
Because the other side tells you that you suck and your problems are not real.
If you are a boy and you look around one side blaming you for all of societies ills and the other simply is not what aide are you going to gravitate to?
Why do you think there are two sides and one of them is blaming men?
One side has crated an entire vocabulary around gender where ever male gendered term is something bad. How else can that be interpreted?
So there are two sides. Everyone in the world falls into one these sides. And all of one side got together and came up with a new set of words. These words they demand everyone use and each has built into them explanations that men are bad.
Can you point to evidence that supports this theory? If it was half of the people I assume there are some large communities these words are heard often but I’ve never heard them.
I was talking about the language used in gender discussion. And yes, in my country there really is no other side beside facist and liberal/left.
Things are already equal. Toxic masculinity comes from toxic femininity. Toxic femininity comes from toxic masculinity. It’s been like that forever, but we raised the living standard enough so now we can argue about this with our excess spare time.
Also, it is another way of divide and conquer to make sure that we keep fighting each other and not the billionaire class who needs to be defeated if you want to have a world in 20 years from now.
The quantum head fuck Is that men and women have always been equal in a weird way and at the same time equality can never be achieved because giving birth was given to one of the two sexes and not the other.
When it comes to class warfare, equality can be achieved.
Because while intelligence and skill and talent may not be equally distributed, the right to live is.
My friend, go outside.
or even pull up the news
I don’t have to, the downvote ratio tells me the divide and conquer is alive and well.
‘The news’ is kinda how they do it.
did you even read the link I posted?
Send me the link that proves that decades feminism has had tangible impact on policy in Western society in data.
You can’t. Because they are not a well funded lobby group and this is a capitalist system you’re trying to change.
Yes, that argument makes anyone who makes it sound like an incel, but that doesn’t mean that’s the case, nor does it invalidate the argument.
We have the sea rising by nearly 5cm per decade now, we blew straight through 1.5° and the President of the biggest military in the world is and actual pedophile.
On the other side men can become women and vice versa without being thrown into a lake to see if they drown or publicly burnt.
I think focusing on climate change and not having the biggest pedophile coverup in human history succeed is a much higher priority.
Teach sons to be good, teach daughters about the sons who aren’t. Help female coworkers negotiate the same salary as men. But then maybe move on to the sons and daughters to be safe, and actually have a future.
<show me proof that contradicts my worldwideOk CB.
The downvote ratio tells you you’re being ignorant. That’s literally it.
The downvotes ratio tell me that the “off with their head” human hive psychology is still working and that’s the primary weapon the oligarchs use to stay in control.
I’m not ignorant, I’m making a point to broaden the perspective, and a few people believed that I’m claiming that “women make enough money now” or “pay inequality is no longer an issue” or “violence against women is not disproportionately larger than with men”.
Oh great, at least one gets it
Sigh.
The only reason someone says my friend is cause they think your an idiot. It’s like saying bless your heart.
And considering what you said… Yeah… Oof
I’ve been saying it like
My friend…
I am not trying to rob you. I’m trying to help you.
Dumb and wrong
The problems with deciding things are “equal-ish” have already been well addressed, so I just want to point out - just because the billionaire class might use a topic as a wedge issue against us doesn’t excuse us from working to fix it.
They might be setting fire to houses as a distraction, but the houses are still on fire. The people inside can’t wait for us to find and deal with whoever hired the arsonists.
I completely agree with you, and that’s a great analogy.
Cartoons like this post aren’t helping the firemen and women though. And if it isn’t helping them, who is it helping?
Nah, they think other people should appreciate that. Because that would make their lives easier, not having to challenge their own privileges.
People seek confirmation that their negative traits are positive ones. Why put in effort to win, when you can just get an echo chamber to explain to you that you already won because of XYZ reason.
This isn’t limited to the manosphere stuff but it certainly is a big part of it. Any group that uses that other people are full of shit though as evidence that they are the good guys is also trying to pull the same trick.
There is value in feminisim because women’s rights are “new” and that is to say that there are people alive who grew up in a time where women’s rights were considered a joke. Women received the ability to have their own bank account without a man co signing in 1974. That means MOST Gen X people, when they were born, their mothers were not legally allowed to have a bank account. That isn’t ancient history like some folks like to act it is.
So… look, I hate having to pick at something that I generally agree with, but it wasn’t illegal for women to have bank accounts or credit cards or whatever prior to 1974. It just became illegal to discriminate against women for bank accounts as of the 1974 law.
I get that it’s a subtle distinction, but the reason it is important is because there are those who would think that as long as the government isn’t actively oppressing a group, then it’s doing fine (“it was illegal for women to have bank accounts, now it’s not. Job’s done!”), as opposed to recognizing that it is people who oppress others and it is the government’s job (like it was in 1974) to prevent it.
Banks (most, anyway) did not allow women to have bank accounts or lines of credit. And they’d do it again (or some other discriminatory bullshit) without government regulation.
I’d like to remind everyone that men’s rights are new too. For example, in the UK, women got rights to vote in 1928. Men got it in 1918, a whole 10 years earlier.
Most of the population was (and continues to be) under the boot of the wealthy, their rights immaterial.
they also watch those “pickup artists” how to “science behind tricking women into dating you”, they picked alot of thier terminology to, which is the alpha/beta crap, shit tests,etc. so they are probably also dissecting womans behaviour, “if they dont like me they automatically a bitch or a slut that is looking for someone more attractive”