37
High school boys are trending conservative
(thehill.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2023
37 points (83.6% liked)
Men's Liberation
1833 readers
30 users here now
This community is first and foremost a feminist community for men and masc people, but it is also a place to talk about men’s issues with a particular focus on intersectionality.
Rules
Everybody is welcome, but this is primarily a space for men and masc people
Non-masculine perspectives are incredibly important in making sure that the lived experiences of others are present in discussions on masculinity, but please remember that this is a space to discuss issues pertaining to men and masc individuals. Be kind, open-minded, and take care that you aren't talking over men expressing their own lived experiences.
Be productive
Be proactive in forming a productive discussion. Constructive criticism of our community is fine, but if you mainly criticize feminism or other people's efforts to solve gender issues, your post/comment will be removed.
Keep the following guidelines in mind when posting:
- Build upon the OP
- Discuss concepts rather than semantics
- No low effort comments
- No personal attacks
Assume good faith
Do not call other submitters' personal experiences into question.
No bigotry
Slurs, hate speech, and negative stereotyping towards marginalized groups will not be tolerated.
No brigading
Do not participate if you have been linked to this discussion from elsewhere. Similarly, links to elsewhere on the threadiverse must promote constructive discussion of men’s issues.
Recommended Reading
- The Will To Change: Men, Masculinity, And Love by bell hooks
- Politics of Masculinities: Men in Movements by Michael Messner
Related Communities
!feminism@beehaw.org
!askmen@lemmy.world
!mensmentalhealth@lemmy.world
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Supposedly it actually is.
If you think about it it’s not that surprising. Sexism was basically a way to subsidize substandard men and guarantee them a sexual partner. If you can’t open a bank account without a man, you find a man, even if he’s an angry ball of mush.
That's true. It's hard for this men to compete on the playing field of being a genuine partner.
Ironically, they prefer to compete on the Manosphere standards of money and fake status. Which is an insane choice
“Damn I really want to get laid. Too bad all these women are such bitches and won’t let me fuck their non existent brains out”
Gee, Foster/Tanner/Tracker/Trigger/Dakota I wonder why that is
The best pickup technique is treat them like a person. It works everytime and when it doesn't you get to talk to a nice person
I remember like 10 years back I was 23 and was riding the bus with young guy from one of the clubs I was in in university. He was maybe 19 or so.
We're on the bus, and a woman boards who looks very pretty and has a satchel with a bunch of enamel pins of the pokemon gym badges on it.
I compliment her flair, and we have a pleasant conversation about pokemon until my stop. Pretty normal stuff.
I disembark with my mentee and he turns to me and goes "WHAT?! IT'S THAT EASY TO TALK TO WOMEN BY JUST ASKING ABOUT THEIR INTERESTS?"
He was just completely unaware that people respond well when you pay attention to them and treat them like people. He was convinced the only way to talk to girls was by using pickup lines.
Crazy how that works.
In fact I agree many men don't have a net positive to offer. What I disagree with is the framing that women are "deciding" that, and I wouldn't discard the idea that the increase in women freedom is contributing factor for an uptick in extremist sexism but I also think that warrants some proper care to back it up as a claim.
I’m confused by what you mean. You mean this is less a revelation about men and more an increased ability to walk away? Sure. I’m damn sure our great grandmammies knew their hubbies weren’t shit.
Yes, that's the point. I might be splitting hairs here, but I think the portrayal of these "confusing times" as a consequence of women walking away is part of the problem. Them walking away is part of the remedy for extremist sexism, not a cause for its increase in strength.
It can be both. Inspiring a reaction doesn’t mean the action is itself any better or worse for it.
It can, sure. But I doubt it is. Do we have evidence of it?
I mean, lots of it
lol k
This is such a foolish perspective. You’re moralizing outcomes. Women entering the workforce caused a massive inflation spike and for wages to stagnate for decades. That’s bad. Women ended up working in the office AND doing all the housework. That’s bad. Was women entering the workforce bad? Fucking of course not.
Good things ALWAYS inspire reaction. That’s why they’re called reactionaries. This is pretty basic political philosophy. Your resistance to it is nonsensical. If you don’t learn the mentality of fascists you will never beat them.
I wouldn't have said so, so I don't see utility in that analogy.
Hah OK, thanks for the lecture. I guess I do need to learn to say "lots" when someone asks me for concrete evidence for a claim.
Imagine being this much a dismissive asshole to someone you KNOW is on your side. Holier than thou morons like you are such a fucking impediment to the advancement of left wing causes.
I think it's just a matter of wording that might be causing a misunderstanding. I don't think he said that this is caused by women 'deciding' to walk away, but rather, for the first times in history, women as a whole have far more agency than they ever had in deciding to be in a relationship or not.
Take everything I say with a grain of salt because I'm not a man. I'm going to make a lot of assumptions about cis men here.
Under the patriarchal norms, many men are raised to derive their self worth based on things that are not always fully within their control such as wealth, looks, employment, etc, many of which are conflated with their ability to attract a partner. Some of these men may have also been socialized into believing that finding a sexual partner is a valid subsistute for emotional connection, because horniness and anger are the only acceptable emotions. This leads to the idea that all women exist to resolve their repressed mental health issues and sexual frustrations.
It's a confusing time for these men because not only are many women becoming more selective towards feminist men who don't adhere as strongly to these ideologies, but many women are also just happily single. Feminism has taught many women, but not enough men, how to live a fulfilling life beyond patriarchal norms. It hasn't done enough to teach men how to find self worth independent of women, how to embrace and process emotions, how to address mental health issues, how to recognize male sexual assault, how to live by yourself, how to empathize with peers, etc.
Women walking away from men is a symptom of feminism teaching them how to fulfilling lives as people, and we have yet to do so as effectively with men. It's not that feminism is teaching women to become single, but that a partner with antiquated views is no longer a prerequisite to a fulfilling life.
I think that's an overall look we can all agree on; and if that's the high level conceptualization that the original comment was aiming for, we're good.
On the other hand, anyone who has a decent number of hetero women friends knows that even though the overall anxiety over being single has reduced (not zeroed, unfortunately), most are open to the idea of a relationship. And if you just go out there and ask them if they believe that such relationship could offer something of value, the answer will be: "of course". And if you have a chat in most groups, stories of recent attempts to build a relationship abound. Women are still very open and as actively pursuant of men - in fact, more than in previous times in some ways.
Hence saying "women are deciding that most men don't have anything of value to offer" is, in my view, an overly dramatic characterization of the feminist thought. We were speaking of extremism and you know what contributes to reactionary movements? Exaggerated characterizations of the other side. We want men to be self sufficient, not MGTOWs.
Amen