You must log in or register to comment.
More men should read The will to change by bell hooks. Patriarchy hurts men in different ways than it does women, we are all oppressed by it, including gender-nonconforming individuals. Patriarchy stunts male emotional health and creates these unhealthy repressed feelings. Rather than blaming women, men should look towards the systems that impact our daily lives and how they force us into little boxes we don’t always fit neatly into naturally, suffocating us and justifying the general subjugation of women, which in no unclear terms exceeds the suffering of men under patriarchy.
I appreciate you taking the time to suggest steps for a better society. I followed the link and read what was available, but there were only a few pages until the index + the front and back cover. I’ll probably look into finding a full copy later. Thanks for thinking about us. <3
I'd like to share my personal story if that's ok. Wall of text incoming and only read if you genuinely want to.
I want to share this because I have an honest question from a place of wanting to be a better person. I realize this isn’t about me, but in order for me to be in service of people other than myself, it is necessary for me to understand some things. I’m respectfully requesting help with that, to you or those willing to educate.
The second part of the meme hits really close to home to me because it’s something lots of men are taught at a young age in a traumatic manner. In my case I can’t count the amount of times I was told to “be a man” or asked if I was “gonna cry like a girl” which could happen literally anywhere by anyone, especially caretakers.
I went to an all boys school. I vividly remember the father of one of my classmates coming to talk to the class when my classmate missed school one day. He begged. Literally, begged to the class to stop teasing and bullying his son because he was going to kill himself any day. This was the 8th grade and was not a one time thing. He was a sensitive kid and got teased for it. He got called the f word a lot in a place and time where coming out of the closet as sexually diverse was considered “valid” grounds for physical violence/abuse by most men. Verbal abuse at the very least.
I was a weird and sensitive kid myself and got teased and bullied as well, but never that much. Was really timid, awkward and shy, but I usually got away with not being beaten up all the time or being straight out emotionally tortured all day like some were, by letting other kids cheat off me. This got me “protection” from some bullies that sat next to me. When I think about how I felt back when I was a kid, all I can remember is fear and wanting to be invisible. Constant fear. I had a whole lot of anger too, but usually lashed out on myself alone. Too scared of everything and everyone to get angry at anyone but myself. My family setting wasn’t a picnic either, but that’s a different story.
Basically, any time anyone gave me any kind of attention, including my parents, I perceived it as a dangerous threatening situation that made me feel uneasy.
I realize most people have been wronged by one or more men in much worse ways. I’m sorry and those of us who have harmed or still harm have no excuse. I shared my story so you understood what became my responsibility and duty to unlearn and remedy to not continue the endless samsara of victimization. I genuinely have been putting in the work I’ve found useful to help me stop causing people harm. Have taken this very seriously for more than decade now.
Here’s my question, in honest good faith.
Do you understand that a book that is intended to be used as a blueprint for positive masculinity that begins by requiring men to “understand patriarchy” can feel, to some men, like when catholic missionaries went to “uncivilized cultures” and made sure everyone “understood the gospel” and was very clear about having original sin and being impure and them needing to be saved?
This is not a rhetoric device I want to use against you or anyone. I am requesting empathy and suggestions on how to deal with this. Like, do you understand that it feels like some people are telling us men that we are devoid of value or have no legitimacy as humans unless we adhere to a specific belief system or “treatment”? Do you have any advice or suggestions for us or idk can you offer insight?
I realize many broken people such as myself and my classmates can become full grown monsters and society should do something that avoids monsters being bred and to treat, lock or remove people that have become monsters.
I just want to know if you understand this, and if you do, my request is you please share your thoughts.
Having read your story, I think you’ll actually love what bell hooks has to say, here. When I said patriarchy affects men and women in different ways, your story is exactly what I mean. Patriarchy puts men into very narrow boxes of what is deemed “acceptable,” and destroys what is outside that boundary. Women are impacted more by patriarchy than men are, but The will to change is a call to action to liberate both women and men from its shackles. It’s a deeply empathetic work that touches on stories very similar to yours, not a condescending authority piece. hooks writes with a deep love and a desire for herself to grow as well, frequently she speaks of her own mistakes and negative feelings towards men such as her father, and how she came to forgive and love him.
Trust me, you’ll love this book by the sounds of it.
Thanks for reading. Gonna look it up right now.
No problem! As a pansexual man myself, who was often bullied relentlessly for being sensitive myself (I was closeted my whole life through schooling and am only recently coming out more), I never felt like hooks was invalidating my experience in any way.
I’m really sorry about what you has to deal with in your past. <3
I’m about 1/6th through the book now and feel the same way.
I mean, if i’m being perfectly honest, i feel like the term “patriarchy” is a little unfair but also I get why it would be chosen and a necessary concept to build from. I guess I feel like no one sex or gender built society on their own and the suggestion of attribution by nomenclature feels like a misleading simplification. This is not something that i’ll lose sleep over, though, and i’m open to hearing out why i’m wrong.
Gonna get back to the book now. It really is a compassionate message. Thanks again.
Glad I could be of help!
It is so fucking odd, how many people are claiming that e.g. the male loneliness issue is blaming women and then agree with your post.
I agree with your post. I just don’t understand how so many people here can agree that the patriarchy is harming men and is e.g. isolating men, but then turn around and act like mentioning the symptoms and talking about them, makes you misogynistic.
I don’t get it. Women have my support, I just hope I will have theirs too.
I support mens health.
Ive a million stories of hurt men who didnt deal or heal well with their hurt, and ended up hurting others (and themselves) for it. Usually its some tragic thing that happened when they were young and never dealt with it, because culturally men have been told to shove it down and man up for decades at least. But, I’ve been told many a tragedy from male family members, friends and ex lovers. And then watched them go from victim to abuser, or some other consequence, and its sad
Men should be taught, and allowed to express themselves. Its literally okay to cry, its a process of emotion.
Support fellow humans
deleted by creator
I liked it a lot! I know people talk about the patriarchy a lot, and thus a lot of what it puts forward isn’t “new,” but the depth hooks goes in on the various facets of patriarchy specifically really helps a lot.
this seems like a good application for LLM ddg llama3.3 “The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity, and Love” is a book written by bell hooks, published in 2004. The book explores the concept of masculinity and its impact on men and society. Here are some key points from the book:
- hooks argues that traditional masculinity is based on a patriarchal model that emphasizes dominance, control, and aggression, which can be harmful to both men and women.
- She contends that this model of masculinity is rooted in a fear of vulnerability, intimacy, and emotional expression, which can lead to violence, addiction, and other forms of destructive behavior.
- hooks suggests that men need to develop a more nuanced and inclusive understanding of masculinity, one that values emotions, relationships, and mutual respect.
- She also argues that men need to take responsibility for their own emotional and psychological well-being, rather than relying on women to care for them.
- The book explores the ways in which patriarchal culture perpetuates violence, racism, and homophobia, and how these systems of oppression intersect and reinforce one another.
- hooks emphasizes the importance of men engaging in feminist activism and working to dismantle patriarchal systems of power.
- She also highlights the need for men to develop healthy relationships with women, children, and other men, based on mutual respect, trust, and communication.
- Throughout the book, hooks draws on a range of sources, including psychology, sociology, philosophy, and personal experience, to create a rich and nuanced exploration of masculinity and its possibilities for transformation.
Overall, “The Will to Change” is a thought-provoking and deeply personal book that challenges readers to think critically about the ways in which masculinity is constructed and performed, and to imagine new possibilities for men and women to live together in greater equality and mutual respect.
- Since you’ve read it does the book also deal with mistake mismanagement? I think the root cause for male loneliness is societies pressure to not make any mistakes and cancel culture. Men don’t wanna be seen as creepy and therefore don’t even bother talking to women anymore since the standard of not being ugly, compared to tropes fueled by social media is unachievable.
hooks suggests that men need to develop a more nuanced and inclusive understanding of masculinity, one that values emotions, relationships, and mutual respect.
Yep, written by a woman. Replace that with “value traversing rivers on couches strapped to floats and having a blast with the pals” and you’ll get somewhere.
Valuing something already is an emotion so you’re being emotional about being emotional about something so, yeah, no. Go climb a tree, create a tasty recipe, fix a shoe. Shave the soap.
Appreciate the key points!
Fr. A male friend of mine got into make up. Nail polish and such. I notice men who do this, stick to safe black. I asked if he wanted more colour, and he did. I remember cracking being a thing back in 2008 or so. A great caviat to go from just black, to black with colour! Perhaps men could bring this back into fashion lol
- Women are male lonliness
- Everything and everyone is weakness
- I’ve made hating dishwashers my entire personality
- There’s a empathy epidemic
I’ve made hating dishwashers my entire personality
But they're so cute!
They have nice racks too.
Nice rack
Thanks but it’s rude to go commenting on other people’s racks like that, you know.
If you are lucky enough to be allowed to play with them it’s pretty safe to say something nice, but if they’re the first thing you mention or you space out staring at them, it’s like the dishwasher doesn’t even matter and you only care about the rack.
We all love handling a good rack but a good dishwasher isn’t an easy thing to come across. Focusing on just one part is kind of like invalidating all the sacrifices and hard work that are necessary for a functional dishwasher.
Maybe you don’t care about any of that and just want to put your hands on or look at a nice rack. That’s perfectly fine, but if that’s the case you might want to consider getting your own rack.
Have a nice day! :)
you might want to consider getting your own rack.
Yes that might be a solution. But it does not matter how tolerant everyone says they are, if you put a rack in a washing machine people might look at you strange. And I feel good as a washing machine, I don’t want to be a dishwasher.
I umm… I mean I guess… wat
consider getting your own rack.
Working on it!
Good luck!
I’ve made hating dishwashers my entire personality
To be fair, I really do hate my dishwasher. It is always like a 50/50 if the top rack is cleaned or the cleaning arm just fell off. Piece of junk.
You can’t talk about women like that bro
Whats a woman?
Mr Walsh you are not welcome here
Boy have I got a video for you!
Technology Connections?
Edit: yep!
Finally got around to view this video. The only applicable tip I have not tried in there is to add some prewash (despite having no spot for it).
So sadly, my dishwasher most likely is just crap.
When all your “friends” are alpha bro podcasters trying to get you to buy shit, yeah you’re gonna be lonely.
The young men’s version of a facebook MLM group.
Are these the same guys that think that eating pussy makes you gay?
It’s no fucking wonder they’re lonely.
Have they tried not being assholes?
Sopranos confirmed that…never made sense…
Anyone who says that has never been offered pussy, at least not twice. I ate pussy before I fucked pussy, although it happenned in short succession
I have always found that being good at it is a very good way to be invited back. It’s the least gay thing that you can do.
I don’t understand misogyny at all. What’s it all about? If you were homosexual and were raised in an ancient Macedonian army or something perhaps you wouldn’t see a mother, sisters, daughters, lovers, work colleagues, neighbors, friends but who lives like that? Boys who live in front of a screen and are too anxious and scared to go outside? Racism I can kind of understand if you only have superficial knowledge of other people and cultures.
Once that testosterone kicks in at puberty women aren’t generally a physical threat to men. I don’t really understand all the fear of them. Some women are really, really cool. Like serious friend material and lifelong partner stuff.
A woman is absolutely a threat to another human. Any animal that size is. That you think women are harmless is ironically, misogyny.
There’s a couple of.good books about this - Delusions of Gender by Fine and Sex, Lies, and Brain Scans. Basically we have implicit and explicit biases in how we expect people to perform roles. However, these biases aren’t based in fact. When we police other people’s behaviors based on these biases, or otherwise force others into roles we’ve developed, it’s bad/abusive.
Women are a special type of role, because that role generally means they have babies (ofc we all know many women who don’t have babies). The ownership of their baby making ability is likely why men created the patriarchy, to endanger women by other men, to force women into proximity of whatever man was able to support them. This, and the narrative that men should fuck as soon as they feel any sexual urges because that’s “being a man,” form the basis for their abuse of women over thousands of years.
Imagine how damaged all our mitochondrial DNA is from our mothers because of this, generations of trauma. And further, the eggs that made up YOU, were inside your mom as a baby, when she was inside HER mom. Meaning your grandma’s stress during and before pregnancy with your mom, had a direct impact on you as an egg. And further further, you get 100% of your cells from your mother, and 50% of your DNA. But every cell of life in your body came from your mother. Her stress and abuse has caused damage to the human condition imo and it is therefore vital to treat women well even if you only care about men.
And a key piece of taking good care of humans, is freedom and bodily autonomy, which form the basis for respect in most animal species.
Which is why misogyny hates all of that and why misogynists also tend to like hurting animals too.
Honestly, this argument comes across to me as a horrible mangling of different pop-sci concepts to construct a victimology. There’s good evidence of the mechanism by which stress and trauma induce epigenetic changes in organisms. (Selective methylization regulating expression of genes.) There’s some evidence of epigenetic changes due to physiological trauma passed down through germ cells. But it’s a huge leap to ascribe mtDNA damage to psychological experiences.
The mitochondria have a degenerate genome, a tiny amount of DNA with (looking it up) 37 genes to support the processing of energy into ATP to power the cell. It is susceptible to epigenetic changes, which leads pretty directly to a number of metabolic disorders, but I can’t find any evidence that those changes result from life experiences of an animal. The idea that mtDNA has accumulated generations of damage from sexist trauma beggars logic, too, because there’s just not a lot of room to collect damage, and that damage leads to health problems fairly directly. If one got every cell of life from one’s mother, in turn, she got it from her mother, and so on all the way back to the first eukaryotic life. All of those generations of trauma, how are we even still living?
Furthermore, the assertion that “men created the patriarchy” ignores actual history and context. One simply cannot ascribe a singular intent to a class comprising billions of individuals across time and space. At best, one could describe patriarchy as an emergent phenomena of societies and cultures. About half of the individuals in those societies and cultures were women, so you’d have to conclude that women helped create patriarchy, unless you deny their agency or intelligence.
It’s literal science, you are mad because it celebrates women so you want to dismiss it as fake. That’s your misogyny.
Men created and upheld the patriarchy by their own personal every day actions. Including their speech, which, like yours, typically functions to uphold a male centered hierarchy.
Yes, the patriarchy literally denied women’s agency and thoughts and stole their ideas from them. Good job, kiddo, you finally got it. Lol omfg. Yes, that IS what I’m saying - Men ENSLAVED women, and we know this because they kept away rights like landownership and political authority and bodily autonomy. Do you even understand the words you type?
So you want us to blindly spew whatever you say, with no critical thinking? I have seen this before.
That would just lead to a few femcels taking over instead, which isn’t much better. And why would we willingly do that?
I have a better idea: focus on doing something against Trump, who is going to literally enslave you, rather than trying to find how everything random men online say is misoginy.
No. Strawman.
It wouldn’t and never has.
I can do many things. Trump is famously a misogynist, a gender narcissist, so being a feminist is indeed focusing in and fighting Trump. You aren’t entitled to dictating my behavior or thoughts.
You insult and accuse me, and many others indirectly. It was inevitable.
Coward.
A woman is absolutely a threat to another human. Any animal that size is. That you think women are harmlessly is ironically, misogyny.
Yes all people are potentially dangerous.
But the biomechanics in adults are very different and need to be recognised. Statistically the physical intimidation is mostly one way when you account for sexual dimorphism in height, weight, reach, muscle mass etc. There are always exceptions but women live in a very different threat environment. That isn’t misogyny.
If people tend to hate what they fear and mysogyny is literally hatred of women like what the fuck? Perhaps some men are terrified of emotional harm. I can understand that but perhaps they would be better off with some therapy or a bit of self awareness.
Maybe, but unfortunately some abusive men just become better at abuse, more sophisticated, when they do therapy because of how therapy can work in validating people. It’s actually not super recommended for a woman dating an abusive man to go to couples therapy or have him go to therapy for this reason. The only way for these men to change their mind, is if they are in groups with other men who enforce other views via discussion, OR if they choose to. The reason you can’t medically treat a narcissist is because it would be brainwashing and unethical to do so if it was possible.
Yes, many cix XY men who are testosterone dominant are taller and have greater arm strength and bone density than many cis XX estrogen dominant women. Not every man and woman fit the cis body ideal of an XX and XY with “perfect” proportions of estrogen, progesterone, GH, testosterone, SHGB, and various other angrogens and enzymes that all combine and compete to create a physical phenotype we call a “woman” or “man.” There are also physical disabilities too.
But look at Stephen Hawking. If we go off pure Oppression Olympics (without looking instead through intersectionality and abuse dynamics), then the girls he was sexually abusing with Epstein were arguably abusing him. They were able bodied, right? He could hardly speak. It’s not just about physical ability then, but about how the entire structure of the patriarchy now being so entrenched we automatically assume roles based on it, regardless of size or proximity to danger. We automatically dismiss the danger of those girls to Hawking because we know the patriarchy stops girls from being violent, it’s not their role.
Except in cases like Chrystul Kizer.
Puh what a rant.
I actually just want to correct you on one thing and I am also Not sure what you really meant.
But we dont get 100% of our cells from our mothers. We get the mitochondria from our mothers. The cells that enclose those mitochondria are perfectly 50/50 after fertilisation.
Wrong. We get 100% of our cells from our mothers She grows every cell. The (1) cell contributed by the father, the sperm cell, is destroyed in the process of DNA exchange/fertilization. Only the egg cell remains, fertilized with 50% DNA from each parent, and it then begins to divide of course. And all of those divisions are of the mother, inside the mother, from the mother’s body. Every cell is created by your mother.
DNA is a different thing, our DNA is in all of our cells, and the information of that DNA is 50/50 (except mitochondrial DNA which 100% mother), but the actual physical amino acids of that DNA were all made by the mother’s body.
Eg I make a sandwich. 50% of the recipe came from me, 50% from Martha Stewart’s cookbook. I provide all ingredients, I make it, I eat it. Martha just provided instructions on how she makes hers and I replicated half of that along with half of my ideas to make a new sandwich.
Men only provide 50% DNA at conception which is 50% INFO, not actual biological material, not cells.
Omg…
Okay, so you do realize that there is no such thing as an „intrinsic mother essence“, right? These are just molecules.
It does NOT matter where the material came from, as long as the molecules are provided. That said, the cells will create most of the molecules variations themself from base molecules, e.g. in case of fatty acid derivatives. Molecules related to energy transfer like NAD or ATP e.g. are generally not provided by the mother but directly synthesized in the cells from predecessor molecules. Similar to all the proteins.
Additionally, there are molecules that are only provided by the mothers body but not synthesized like essential amino acids. They actually have an external origin.
Neither are your cells cow cells because you drink milk or tomato cells because you eat tomatos.
Not sure how the provision of building blocks makes these cells the mothers cells. They Are NOT cells of the mothers body.
You are absolutely clueless, I fear.
I never said there was a “mother essence”, don’t strawman.
Amino acids rarely come in their broken down form, the mother digests them to break them down. That’s how cow milk is broken down into its parts, as you so wisely point out later.
Further, she provides all those molecules and the first molecule.
She made those cells. Why do you want to deny this? It’s honestly so funny, like you’re discovering pregnancy for the first time
Look, whatever dude. Believe in a flat earth or whatever you like.
Still, The fetus‘ cells are not cells of the mother. The few molecules of the egg cell quickly dilute in a sea of newly synthesized molecules by the metabolism of the zygote and its repeating cell Division cycle.
You can keep repeating „because the building blocks are provided by the mother“. But that does not make the cells any more their mothers cells than, again, you being a cow when consuming milk. Your logic does Not make sense.
Its similar (not like) recycling. If I melt down metal from old computers to create a new computer. Then we have actually new components, a new computer. Its Not made up of the old Computer in a conventional sense. Sure on the atomic level its mostly the same atoms, but Talking about inheritance on that level brings the discussion to a completely ridiculous level.
Not sure how you justify any other view on this. Certainly not on the grounds of natural sciences or logic.
Lol it’s not flat earth. Who has the egg? Whose cell is the egg? The zygote is primarily made of the egg and the division and supplies for such are from the mother.
Again, cow’s milk goes in your mouth. Whereas this is being synthesized in your uterus. It’s different, no matter how much you want it to be the same. It’s more akin to a tumor.
The cells come from the mother. They certainly don’t come from the father or from nothingness. Ergo, from mom. That’s how that works. Matter neither created nor destroyed, thermodynamics, etc
If you really want to get pedantic, you could say we inherit our first cell membrane and mitochindria from our mothers, 50% of our genetic material, and perhaps 95% of our first cell’s cytoplasm.
After that, our mothers provide material that the zygote/fetus uses to build itself. It sounds incorrect to say we get all our cells from our mother, since she’s not making the cells, but only providing material and a place to grow. I know what you mean and share your sentiment. When gardening, did I grow these plants or did they grow themselves? Did the workers build the car, or did the owner of the factory?
Also the info provided by the father is absolutely biological material.
She is making the cells. The cells are hers. Just like a cancer mass has different DNA from the host but we can recognize that it belongs to the host and was made by the host, and isn’t autonomous outside of the host. The cells can belong to both the tumor and the patient. Just like these cells are made by the mother, belong to the mother, and are also made by and belong to the fetus. Or do you not thing the original egg cell belonged to the mother?
The info provided is biological material in the sense that the initial DNA/RNA are a biological material, but they are not cells.
I don’t make a car or a plant in my uterus off my own life force, but nice try.
Okay no, that’s not how it works at all. The differences in DNA between cancer cell and non-cancerous cell are negligable when compared to the differences between mother DNA and zygote/fetal DNA. If those fetal cells escaped the placenta or uterus, the mother’s immune system would attack them because they’re not recognized as “self.”
Sure, it’s the mother’s egg, until it isn’t. It quickly becomes something else biologically at the moment of fertilization.
Again, the mother isn’t making the cells, the zygote/fetal cells are making themselves.
It’s clear you have some beliefs that are not backed up by science. You also did not understand my analogies. I’m sure you’ll eventually learn this stuff in school.
Okay, so let’s pretend the a zygote is an incest zygote, then it’s DNA will be much closer. Repeat the argument.
I understand you, I disagree and have explained thoroughly where I disagree.
Exactly when “isn’t” it hers? The zygote cannot create matter out of nothing - who gives it that material?
Maybe they mean literally the body composition of a fetus when it starts to grow as it feeds off via placenta, like it literally gets 100% of the mass from the mother’s organism
Look. My mother gave me more than enough trauma as a kid. I don’t need you telling me she started before SHE was even born.
This is a perfect description of the male and female meta. It is why males are stronger. Not to protect or lead, but to control through fear and violence.
It’s a priviledge men developed a higher sensitivity to oxytocin to compensate for a lower expression of the stuff. Enabling men to give a damn about someone other than their desire to dominate. Men can love their partner, their family, friends, their pets because of this.
Chimps ain’t that lucky, and males would rather watch an orphan die from neglect (and eat it) than take care of it. The males are known to kill females for showing assertive behaviour.
Same goes for prolactin in the brain, that makes humans more monogamous and increases a desire to protect something you care about. It never was a male feature before, but it became one in humans. It even peaks after the baby is born and the father is exposed to seeing his baby. Over time, similar adaptations to the brains of pregnant women, are seen in father’s brains. Which is amazing.
Men ain’t that bad, but old habits die hard. Men are more aggressive, stronger, more impulsive and less afraid of consequences on average compared to women. Those who were better at avoiding male aggression, lived longer. Hence why estrogens play a role in stimulating brain development in areas essential to risk assesment, consequence sensitivity, resistance to suicide, thinking ahead, planning, reading emotions (of themselves and others), learning and memory, reducing own aggression, communication and impulse control. Giving women an edge in academical performance despite there not being a statistical difference in intelligence. (Imagine if men had these boons instead…)
While all those obvious “big scary male” traits in men makes them seem like a bigger threat, women are well equipped and know how to dominate and eliminate people indirectly.
None of this is true and shows an extremely shallow understanding of neurochemistry. Please watch Sapolsky. Read Delusions of Gender. Talk to trans people. Try out some hormones. You’re just wrong and it’s creepy and weird.
They don’t hate women, they just like to dominate.
80% of car accidents here are caused by wreckless driving by guys.
Guys are more dominant, and dominating women is viewed as misogyny.
Do not misunderstand. There’s no hatred for women.
Except in niche cases like my mate that got his heart broken at age 15 when he was fat, then he went on and dated 5 girls at the same time because he didn’t trust them. Then basically kept 1 of them and is now in a long term relationship. The one girl never knowing that he did that.
He was raised by his grandparents/single mother.
His dad went on to have a 2nd family where he wouldn’t be a deadbeat father. So it’s kinda idk… it’s his stuff.
So I guess there can be some hatred for women when it comes to having a broken heart and trust issues. But that’s mostly for young guys.
Hating people is mostly a dumb thing to do, but it’s not always a choice. You get your heart broken, love turns to hate until enough time passes before it can become indifference and you move on.
Racism… 14 year olds are idiots. They segregate themselves by how they look and sound like and start fighting with eachother.
Russia phobia 😎 well, they done fucked up didn’t they?
What else do we have…
Sinophobia… scary government bruv
Western phobia… I’ll let LMs write that one out
Phobia’s a normal thing, gets eliminated by long term communication
As a fat highschooler, ehen, as a fat woman highschooler, i got rejected so many times. Never once did it make me hate and distrust men. Because every person is their own.
Get fit. Just do it. I started working out when I was 17, been doing for 12 years now. Best investment.
I did.
I was big growing up because my guardian literally kept me in my room, threw McDonald’s at me and called me a fat bitch. I was allowed to go to school, and go to my room from age 12-16. When he was arrested i lost 60 pounds, gained it back though. Then when i was 21 i lost 80 pounds in 11 months, i worked hard, rode my bike to work.
Then, I got pregnant at 25. Gained for that- but lost it all fast with nursing and maintained healthy weight until the pandemic. I liked hiking, and riding my bike to work, and ate whole foods, i had, had fast food a whole 3 times since i was 21. … until i was 32. My male coworkers ate bk for lunch every day, they were thin, our work was hard (i lifted and packed approx 2000-3000 pounds of material we made a shift), so i started getting Bk too. And i got fat.
The pandemic hit and my now husband got the unemployment, so he ordered restaurant food nearly 5x a week. I left my job to support my kid. I peaked my weight again.
Now, at 37 years old, with a special needs child, no walkability in my neighborhood, and no car (we have one car and he works a lot) to drive to the trails… my son at seven, stopped liking hiking anyway, i find myself stuck in my house. (The last time i took him he literally just layed down in the beginning of the trail and refused to move, its kind of funny now). This also was when hubs was ordering hella food, id get a salad or whatever but fries are just, a god. Anyway
I live a pretty isolated life. I signed up $40/month for a gym with a pool and was swimming last year, but when i only have a one hour window (with the car) to go a day, and the pool schedule being what it was, i stopped going. Excuse? Sure, but i always found it easist to lose weight and exercise when it was baked into my life, and not like, going to the gym, i dont want people to see the fat girl run, even when i was 21 i would run my neighborhood at night so people couldnt see me. But i liked the pool, i just cant get there without a car, which i dont have. My bike is broken, i sont onow how to fix it, and cant afford to, and like i said, you come out my little neighborhood, its immediately highway. I walked with ny son up there one day to try and go somewhere, and someone took a right on red, when we had the crosswalk, and nearly hit us. All you could hear was cars, and smell exhaust- truly aweful pedestrian experience.
Im back on whole foods, but its not really what i eat now, its seditary lifestyle. “So get out there!” One might say, i have highways on two sides of me, and an airport on the other, and a swamp on the otherside. My favorite local grocer is .6 miles from me measured directly through the swamp to the strip mall, you have to take a highway to get there. It’s so frustrating, i would walk. I really would. I struggle to work out on my own, my husband is tall and thin, and hates working out, so im on my own. Thats the hard part. Im keep eating my veggies and whole foods and continue to work on it, since i turned 32 my goal is to get fit again by 40.
My husband got a sword and i was messing around with it, and realized my arms have gotten weak, so just this week i started doing push ups. Or even just trying to hold myself up in that planking position. I work on my binge eating disorder with my therapist because, being alone in the house, with no friends to invite me anywhere, just readig the Internet some mornings, is enough to say, "I don’t care I’m making nachos for breakfast, it doesnt make dishes, i dont feel like cleaning the god damn cutting board and doing dishes. I do em all by hand, and when you cook from scratch, dishes are… plentiful.
Anyway, i know its the best thing. I remember when i could run without getting winded, the energy i had, I refuse elevators and take the stairs at my therapist office, and i get mad im winded when i reach the top. Got tree work to do this week, idk. It’s not that im lazy, my binge really is just fucking nachos, and about six months ago, i decided, even if im binge nachos, i make a portion half what i used to, and double the jalapenos.
Youre preaching to the choir on this.
I want to add, the fist time i binge ate, i was 8 years old. My guardian had a snack draw, full of all the 90s kid corn syrup you could want. We were to pack two for our lunches each day. My guardian was a severe misogynist, and even at 8, i was angry all the fat boys in media were clowns and funny and liked, and the fat girls were basically conveyed as trolls.
I remember hearing “growing boys need to eat”, and at 8(edit maybe i was 10), i thought, im growing too, why cant i eat? And i ate up that snack draw. It was my first protest to “girls should only eat things they look cute eating”.
I like to think if i had a proper mother maybe that wouldnt have happened. But the mother i had, i saw once a month and didnt eat ant veggies, was thin, but meat and potatoes is all she ever ate, water tasted bad to her and she only drank coffee. She was never a big part of my life. But my misogynist guardian was, and thus began my disorder. “Mayo puts hair on your chest; women are weak and stupid, i dont date fat women” ect I would hear and it would piss me off. I got fat, and i was the “daughter” he didnt rape. It protected me, in a way, but ive a mouth and i wish he would have tried, i could have gotten us kids out sooner.
As a teen hed throw fast food at me and call me names while i was confined to my room, not even allowed out by the end, to use the bathroom.
I have c-ptsd, and now at 37 still fucking stuggle with it. I just wish i could live somewhere walkable, and i miss my 20s when i did live in a place like that.
Shoulda just killed him to be honest, but oh well
Your husband could try and get a job in Europe. Here in flanders there’s quite a lot of walkability. They are creating bike lanes. I’m lucky that I can bike to work 15 km without interacting much with cars.
I could suggest Indonesia, for 100k euros you have a nice apartment with access to a gym and swimming pool. But I don’t know about the needs of your child. They don’t really speak English there either, but Bahasa is pretty easy to learn.
Personally I’d go to Batam, Indonesia. Right under Singapore. Live in the center.
For walkability it’s bad there kinda. And hot. Be careful of things like construction work. Can’t really know if it’s all safe.
The solution is not moving country. God if it were that easy.
Bought my wife a home bike so that she could do some cardio while I worked. It’s good for the winter, it gets pretty cold here for her. She’s used to Indonesia and in Belgium it gets to 0 to minus 10 degrees in the winter months.
It’s a good option because you can read something while doing that. Basically you can be on the internet.
When you’re more fit, I’d suggest rope skipping. However it can be hard on the joints. It’s very good cardio though. Boxers do it all the time.
You also can buy some kettlebells. I have one of 16 and 20 kg at home, it takes no space at all. I use them for shoulder raises. They can be used for swings which is great cardio.
You can do bodyweight squats. I do 5 sets of 50 on a Sunday when I’m “too lazy” to fix up the weight for deadlift.
In all these years of working out, I quickly made the investment to have a home gym. Not because it’s cheaper in the long term, but because it’s far easier to actually do the workout.
The most difficult part about working out at a gym is getting to the gym. It feels like a drag. Sure, once at the gym it’s all great, but getting there the next time is once again a drag.
About food I don’t know shit though. I consume a lot of calories. Me working out and stuff like that is what I call damage control. I’m a stereotypical Belgian. I eat a lot of fries with mayo and drink strong beer.
Working out, and likely food, is all about mental stuff. Truly it’s half the battle. Need to figure out how to do a routine and keep to it. Like right now I’m going to do barbell rows because it’s Thursday. I don’t even view it as an option, it’s just what my Thursday looks like.
Good luck, getting back into shape is always difficult. But you know that after 2 months you’ll have a lot of energy. Then the trick is to keep working out just to keep that amount of energy.
Wrong. Wrong wrong wrong.
Please take the time to listen to this lecture. It will genuinely help you and it’s very entertaining imo.
Testosterone causes enforcement, not aggression or dominance of women. Enforcement. Sapolsky did a famous study on baboons about this, amd we also have a human example - Buddhist monks who go around “enforcing” peace by chanting and praying etc.
Men hate women because they believe they should, they abuse women because they give themselves permission to do so. No other reason. Anything else is an excuse and justification for it. Read “Why Does He Do That?” By Lundy or “Stop Caretaking the Borderline or Narcissist” to learn more.
Bigotry is a product of narcissism, which is based in delusional beliefs. A narcissist may never get better. A racial narcissist example is a white supremacist (“my race is best”), which is obviously delusional, which causes narcissistic supply every time they confront it and refuse to let the delusion be corrected. They then will act out, eg say racist slurs, to enforce their racial narcissism on others to satisfy their brain chemistry (it’s deeply uncomfortable to resist unlearning delusional beliefs when faced with evidence, so they satisfy the histamine with adrenaline rushes included by being antisocial).
Narcissism is a scapegoat. Since a narcissist doesn’t know they are a narcissist. So the person can never defend themselves against you calling them a narcissist.
The term has been overused in the past few decades. I would only accept it if a well trained psychologist/psychiatrist would claim it about people. Otherwise, just can’t trust the source.
Everytime some folks talk about racial supremacy… they always talk about white supremacy and call it bad. Then I’d just say something like what about Han supremacy? Then they just act like it doesn’t exist.
All this bullshit can be fun, but there’s a lot of factors at play.
You can’t say it’s all nurture and no nature. The differences are far too big. In Belgium guys and girls are raised together. The same schools, the same families, the same government funding.
Sure there vast differences between the two female CFO’s I’ve worked for. Same for the male employers I’ve worked for. The two that showed signs of aggression were both large people. A woman and a man. They physically had the ability to cause damage on someone else.
My mom was the one doing the reckless driving and my dad drives perfectly. Aggression comes from my mom’s side of the family and level headedness from my dad’s side of the family.
Ah, whatever. It’s far too broad of a subject to be definite about. Too many factors at play
Narcissists can know they are narcissists, it’s just extremely shameful to them to admit it. What they admit or acknowledge is irrelevant though, as the more important thing is to recognize them because it makes them immediately disadvantaged. Narcissts can’t defend themselves because being a narcissist, makes them disadvantaged, because they are delusional. That’s fine if a white supremacist is disadvantaged and can’t defend himself. That’s good. Lol.
I don’t care if you accept it or understand it.
There are other type of racial narcissists besides white supremacists. White supremacists are widely studied because of the KKK and the Holocaust, among others, plus the so obvious not being better thing… It’s a classic example. Stop defending it, it’s obvious you bring up other races so that you, a white supremacist, can engage in your delusions about hating other races and confirm it.
When you’re told that white people aren’t best, it’s irritating you, right? That’s histamine, it helps you learn. Brain is literally releasing it so you can change your mind. You’ve learned to combat this histamine rush with anxiety and adrenaline (the -phobia part of narcissism), and externalizing and confirming your delusions of white people being supreme, so you automatically switch to bashing PoC to create brain connections to solidify the delusion. No one wants to engage with you because you’re sick and misinformed and they don’t want to make it worse by adding to those connections when you need to clean up and prune other connections first.
You can’t say it’s all nurture and no nature
Then take hormones and tell us how different you are. Go live as a woman. No one is stopping you. The fact that agender and multigender and intersex people exist shows that these binaries don’t exist and if there are hormonal and genetic influences on gendered behavior, why does gender expression change over time and in different places? Why aren’t you wearing a white fluffy wig and button up boots? Why don’t you have long hair and a dress like Jesus? Are you a fishing guy, a football guy, a soccer guy, a DnD guy, a rock climbing guy, etc - all different expressions of male gender, right? Why is someone with XY genes and complete androgen insensitivity labeled a girl? What gender is someone with Klinefelter’s (XXY)?
Aggressive behaviors happen because the person doing them has given themselves permission to do so.
Would your mom act as aggressively in front of her boss or someone she wants to impress? Or is she more openly aggressive in front of her family? And many large people actually have a “gentle giant” reputation, it’s just down to whatever that person thinks is an acceptable behavior.
In “Why Does He Do That?” Lundy asks abusers why they didn’t keep going. He says something like, “you punched her and shoved her to the ground, why didn’t you kick her in the face then? You could’ve really gotten her good then.” And the abuser will look genuinely shocked and say, “I would never do THAT, that could seriously kill her or hurt her.” They know. They have control. They would change their behavior if there were witnesses they cared about. They CHOOSE those actions because they give themselves permission.
Yeah I can’t take you serious when you call me a white supremacist. When you antagonise people, they won’t care about all that much that you say.
Then you call them a narcissist so that you don’t have to care.
I am not going to experiment with estrogen, I like muscle.
It’s just an ad hominem argumentation. Very low quality
And what kind of ridiculous term is PoC. Trust me, I’m far more anti American than anti Asia/Africa/middle east/south American.
That term just signals me that you’re American, and because of that, I actually start being xenophobic against you. Which is quite fun innit.
When I see dead bodies and it’s said that it’s a russian. Then I won’t care.
Bloody fun thing, the human mind.
You are a white supremacist by your own words. Too ashamed to admit it, though, just like I said in my first paragraph.
That’s not what ad hominem is.
Sure, you can be a geographical narcissist (xenophobe) too on top of being a racial narcissist. A lot of narcissists overlap but not always, and that’s why we get unique narcissistic individuals. Physical narcissists, gender narcissists, intellectual narcissists, etc. Many ways they interact.
And then if I spoke with you about something that is neutral and doesn’t trigger your narcissism, like maybe video games, then we’d be okay and we could have a polite conversation. Because narcissism is primarily delusions-based.
Nah I’d prefer being called a European supremacist, can you do that instead? The child in my wife’s uterus is going to be Eurasian.
Now we got the choice between raising it in Europe or in Asia and I prefer Europe. Although it depends on where in these two locations. Belgium Vs Indonesia. My main concern is the heat. The rest is fine, but god damn I want my winters.
Everyone has narcissistic traits, we can just call it self esteem. But only a very small part of the population has Narcissistic personality disorder.
It is 50% genetic 👀 so we’re back to nature/nurture blabla.
My mom did have quite the symptoms of the disorder. Mainly she thought that everyone was envious of her and that anything someone did was just something to affect her.
Now personally I have different symptoms, it doesn’t use other people, it’s mainly self esteem stuff like: I can get sexually turned on by looking in a mirror. I think I’m above average intellectually able. I think I make good decisions. I love talking about the details of my life. (I’m also interested in details of others their lives, most people lack the desire to be transparent). I also like talking about details bout anything to be honest. It’s just that I know a lot of my own life.
Now. Psychologist puts all of that on “mild autism”. Since my dad is autistic.
Now… Call me autist supremacist 😎 literally different brain wiring.
Aight I’ll put it on for an hour on YouTube vanced
Edit:
This guy is of far higher quality.
The video you showed me, god damn… the rambling goes on and on. Do not pay for his lectures, he’s just stretching the hour and giving you no content. Just money money money
This guy (even though you might hate him for being Israeli) is brilliant though. World renowned.
He’s been one of the leading neuroscientists and primate behaviorists in the world for decades now. Its not rambling, it’s information, and your brain is tired of learning. That’s just what learning feels like. Don’t you know that by now? It’ll take you time to learn. And he’s not saying anything about money? He’s talking about his research literally. How sad, our planet really has fallen so far in terms of academic discourse. Genuinely disappointing.
Nah he’s quite bad at holding my attention unlike Yuval noah harari
How truly sad
You externalize your difficulty with learning on the speaker.
Perhaps don’t speak then about subjects you can’t even learn at an introductory 101 level.
I’mma try that. I’mma sell my services and when a customer isn’t happy about the quality of my services (the fella is literally being paid to teach a certain amount of time), then I’m just going to gaslight the customer that they are the ones at fault.
I gave you a substitute for a far better speaker.
I prefer to listen to his new book Nexus.
Do give me a break, this isn’t my native language. The quality of communication is rather important in order to transfer information into me.
like YouTube free documentary. That’s high quality communication.
Le chat:
"Men are statistically more likely to be violent than women, according to various studies and data. This tendency is reflected in higher rates of violent crimes, such as intimate partner violence, murder, assault, and rape, where men are the predominant perpetrators. Several factors contribute to this disparity:
-
Biological Factors: Evolutionary perspectives suggest that male aggression has been shaped by sexual selection, where men compete more intensely for access to mates. This competition has led to physical characteristics such as larger size and strength, which are associated with greater physical aggressiveness.
-
Social and Cultural Factors: Social conditioning and societal expectations play a significant role. Men are often encouraged to be aggressive and dominant, while women are typically socialized to be more submissive and passive.
-
Neurological Differences: Studies using fMRI and EEG have shown differences in brain activity related to aggression. Men tend to have higher amygdala activation during provocation, which is associated with impulsive aggression.
-
Behavioral Differences: From a young age, boys and girls exhibit different levels of physical aggression. While both genders peak in physical aggressiveness between two and four years old, girls learn to suppress these behaviors more quickly than boys.
-
Types of Aggression: Men tend to express physical, overt, and direct aggression more frequently, whereas women are more likely to engage in relational and indirect forms of aggression.
These factors combined contribute to the overall higher levels of violence observed in men compared to women."
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4643362/
https://science.howstuffworks.com/life/inside-the-mind/emotions/men-more-violent.htm
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187704281200287X
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/behavioral-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnbeh.2018.00081/full
Lol this proves my point, thanks for playing
Who downvoted you lol. But yeah, that’s literally just AI.
I use AI to provide a less biased view whenever I talk about subjects I’m not that experienced in.
Because the last thing I want is to be influenced by an extremist.
Edit:
Now now now now, the best thing is communication and not antagonising one another.
But that do be quite a challenge
-
Power to control women and force them to have sex with you. A bit like rape, but less crude.
This is just a toxic gender wars meme. Go outside, touch some grass, meet someone nice and move on with life. Memes like this come from and perpetuate the loneliness epidemic.
Accurately observing that the “male loneliness epidemic” is self-inflicted bullshit isn’t “toxic gender wars” except if you are a right wing traitor lunatic.
Edit: if you genuinely believe there is a male loneliness epidemic that is not self-inflicted, you deserve a whole lot worse than prison.
Wow yikes. You sound like fun at parties. Go find someone to care about.
For the record, I think there is a loneliness epidemic for both genders.
> capitalism
> self-inflictedSure, bud.
Lmao is a worthless traitor dumbfuck trying to pretend that capitalism is the root cause of “male loneliness”? That’s some bottom of the barrel thinking even for incels. Reminds me of the braincel shitbag who said women should be redistributed via Marxism. Shore bud indeed, traitor.
Alienation. Exploitation. Heard of it?
Capitalism has bereft men even of the patriarchal provider role as there’s no fucking time in the day to earn both rent and have any type of social interaction, much less time to reflect on your approach to life. Your position as a gear churning out profit for the bosses has been meticulously designed and drilled into you while you were a kid, blind obedience instilled by teachers and BS “zero tolerance punish the victim” rules. There is no use for you aside from that assigned role, happiness, connection, community, work//life balance? Don’t make a profit. Get out of here with that commie nonsense we have quarterly figures to hit.
Or, maybe, yes, you do have a point: I should have said late-stage capitalism. The internal contradictions are actively eroding it by now.
That’s not at all what people mean at all. Men are not more alienated than any other gender by capitalist lunacy. This “male loneliness epidemic” is a euphemism for late stage male supremacy.
You’re right after that comes the patriarchal, or just gendered, double-whammy: Women culturally do have more of a support network, even just in the “friends hanging out” way, as the male “do things together, chop wood, go fishing” is regarded as work, not leisure, and thus co-opted by capitalism: “What do you need to chop food and fish for, go buy fuel and food are you poor or something”. Thus all the productive time men have is spent in a hierarchical worker-boss environment, never “pals doing stuff”, cue loss of connection, alienation from broader society, loneliness. Going bowling? Time not spent hustling, you’re a loser. That’s your mind on patriarchal capitalism.
Thus, even if the starting conditions inflicted by capitalism are, for the sake of argument, completely even, it still hits men harder when it comes to loneliness. Women are more affected in other ways. This isn’t an olympics, it’s analysis of the material conditions we live under.
Couldn’t agree more, matey :)
Downvoted for being unnecessarily antagonistic.
I’m currently a stay at home husband who does all the cooking, cleaning and dishes. I never felt manlier and have never been so attractive to women (according to my wifes friends at least). Looking forward to our first child arriving soon.
I have plenty of single male friends who seem stuck in their early 20s (even though they’re approaching 40). Their only care in the world seem to be “the economy” (something they barely understand), and whatever the newest *-maxxing scam is being promoted on Instagram that will magically make women gravitate towards them. They’re all pretty good looking and mostly nice people. The main problem being that they’re cheapskates and won’t lift a finger for anything not directly benefitting themselves. They don’t know how to cook, and learning anything unrelated to their jobs is seen as a “waste of time”.
I’m very happy I didn’t get stuck in that sort of rut as I’ve seen how easy it was for my friends.
A lot of women find empathy sexy. The women who only go for alpha males are the ones you usually want to avoid.
Alpha male isn’t even a thing. Not even in nature. People who call themselves that are mostly delusional assholes no-one likes.
To add onto that, the guy that originally published the “alpha male” study spent a lot of time trying to correct public views and publish corrective studies because he discovered the behavior was only in wolves kept in captivity. IIRC.
No, they are biologically real, despite it being obsolete nomenclature iirc. Alpha doesn’t equate to “good” though. Just dominance.They exist in most if not all tournament species, but not so much in pair bonding apecies.
You can determine what category species fall under just by looking at average size differences of male and female skulls/other bone.
This provides a ton of information about mating habits, intersexual aggression, likelyhood of infidelity, role of males in raising kids and whole lot more.
Humans are in am evolutionary transition period from tournament to pair bonding.
All that being said, the traits selected to determine alphas can be about aggression and dominance and they can be about beauty, collaboration and territorial. Thia gets complex in birds and primates.
Alao, whatever strategy has the best chances of successfully reproducing and surviving through time does not automagically become legitimate, valuable or desireable. You need an extra ingredient for that. Priorities, which require value.
It’s kind of a thing in certain animals, but not wolves like originally claimed. The certain animals here being mostly primates, so it’s even more applicable.
That said, the politics of social primates are notoriously complex and many cultures have unique behaviors within the species, so there aren’t really any universal rules particularly among the most social groups.
TBH, Silverbacks are actually good role models: Big, bulky, sit around grooming the troupe, know everyone, emotionally support everyone, when someone wants to start a fight, intervenes, “You wanna fight? Yeah, fight me! Both of you at once, if need be!” – and then suddenly the others lost interest in fighting.
Proverbial gymbro speaking softly and carrying a big stick, far from a tyrant, you know the type. Chimpanzees are the closest to us, with warfare and everything. Bonobos are… well, they are what biologists start talking about when they want to get into your pants. Let’s just say there’s a reason you don’t see them in zoos, parents don’t want to hear kids asking those kinds of questions.
Isn’t it weird that for humans, sex is a private matter? Completely singular among all the animals. And that’s independent of social status, like a smaller sea lion seducing a female one while the big hunk de jure leading the pack isn’t looking, it’s universal. Even if sex is a group activity, then that group itself is putting up layers of privateness and propriety. Swinger clubs with fancy dress codes, doesn’t matter if you end up naked but you have to start out in suit and tie.
If a scientist would, today, discover humanity and describe their behaviour they’d be laughed out of any conference, “did you get your notes mixed up”. “Next thing you want to tell us camelopards are real”.
Most people can pull a trigger.
There is nothing universally sexier than knowing exactly who you are and being perfectly satisfied with it. Good for you, man. Congrats for the bun in the oven too. <3
I’m currently a stay at home husband who does all the cooking, cleaning and dishes.
Easy to throw stones when you’re not the one responsible for keeping the lights on.
Who’s throwing stones? These friends are clearly unhappy and only getting worse because of dumb shit on social media. I’d help them if they’d listen.
You are.
The main problem being that they’re cheapskates and won’t lift a finger for anything not directly benefitting themselves. They don’t know how to cook, and learning anything unrelated to their jobs is seen as a “waste of time”
Maybe they’re stuck trying to get ahead in their career and don’t have the mental energy to focus on anything else. Most single dudes I know are focused on their careers because where they’re at doesn’t meet their needs or isn’t enough to meet their goals even if the goal is as simple as just owning a home and be able to retire someday.
If your goals in life start and end with personal wealth, you should expect stones thrown at you. Not sure what else you’re expecting with that level of egotism.
It’s not wealth I’m after. It’s security. I want to be able to reach a point in my life where I don’t have to give 50+ hours of my time every week to some fucking company that doesn’t give a shit about me just to barely scrape by on rent and groceries. I can’t do that from where I’m so I have to save money wherever possible and build my career. Congrats to the guy I responded to for finding someone willing and capable of providing for him but most of us aren’t going to be so fortunate.
Let me be more blunt about this.
You’re going to die. No matter how much money you make, no matter whether you own your own house or not, no matter whether you can buy whatever food you fancy, you are going to die.
If you’re spending your life just thinking about how to make more money, your life is pointless. Do something better with it.
What do you propose I do? I already said I’m fucking broke. I have no space of my own to do hobbies. I can’t afford to travel. I go out with my friends a couple times a month and that kills my spending budget because everything is expensive now. I just had to buy a laptop and get my car worked on (again because I don’t have a space of my own to do it myself) and just that wiped out six months of savings. How can I think about anything but money when if I take my eye off the ball I’ll be fucked?
There really is a bit of a catch-22 in my book that’s centered completely around self confidence. If you are proud of who you are, if you are living up to your ideals, you are simultaneously much more attractive to others, and at the same time you realize that you don’t need others - but they sure are the cherry on top.
Pygmalion is real. Belief is a powerful thing. Some may even call it “faith”.
This is why hope is important.
Reading this, specifically had me think of an old friend i had. He was always sceming. Every time i saw him he had a new one. Weather he was stealing company supplies from his employer, so he could start his own landscaping business, or asking me to use my doordash account, or wanting me to help him start a flower business, which i never helped with any of it because i dont agree with lying/cheating through life, while every bit of his life seemed some backdoor plan- I would have dated him, once apon a time, but ten years into the friendship, he sent me a ben Shapiro video, a d a few years ago, i terminated the friendship. Every thing was transactional with that man. He was good looking and kind, but my god these traits were such a turn off, I dont care if you work at hime depot, or the hardware store- my husband today is a chef- its better than scheming to rip someone off so you can get ahead. Thats selfish imo.
Surely you would learn to cook your own food if you are a cheapskate? It’s so much cheaper making your own, I had to through necessity for a long time. While I already knew a few recipes I generally couldn’t afford them when I moved out. Beef mince? Hah! Not a chance.
Turns out making your own sourdough pizza from scratch is crazy cheap. Cheese is the most expensive part.
Right on my dad was my stay at home parent when I was little and he was a green beret in Vietnam. He was by far my most nurturing and loving parent. I was very lucky to have had him
There’s not a male loneliness epidemic.
There’s a loneliness epidemic.
https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/surgeon-general-social-connection-advisory.pdf
“Joking” by trying to turn this into men vs women is pretty gross.
The solutions look a lot different for the real loneliness epidemic than a “male loneliness epidemic”. You fix the first by creating more walkable cities, more third places you can be without needing to spend money, and giving people the time and money they need to go out, do things, and socialize.
The proposed solutions for the “male loneliness epidemic” seem to be a lot more like shitty men saying “women need to lower their standards and be okay with being my therapist/mom/girlfriend, while I change nothing about myself”
To the average person not caught up in culture war issues, the OP looks like the exact mirror of “women need to lower their standards and be okay with being my therapist/mom/girlfriend, while I change nothing about myself”. That’s a disgusting take, as is saying that men are lonely because they objectify women and have no empathy.
On their face they’re both shitty misogynist/misandrist viewpoints.
It’s bigotry and sharing bigoted memes is wrong, regardless of which ‘side’ is being targeted.
In addition, the underlying message in both of these viewpoints is an attempt to frame the real loneliness epidemic as something that is fabricated by ‘the other side’ and not a real issue with real victims.
There’s a reason the guy in the meme is dressed like a clown.
I completely understand the meme.
I just think the underlying assumptions that the joke is built on are misandrist. In addition, the implication that the loneliness epidemic isn’t real or is largely caused by men (or women in the reverse of this meme) is causing real damage.
You can’t talk about loneliness online without toxic people (“incel”/“femcel”) using these kind of “jokes” to be bigots and people who’re not steeped in online culture read this as “men are lonely because they objectify women and are have no empathy”
It’s not against the community rules, but it’s a joke built on bigotry and I think it’s toxic.
It is a parody of the incel belief system, not actually meant to represent an equal cross section of society
It can be read either way.
It’s also simple enough in structure to be generated slop and the OP could just be an automated account.
It’s hard to say what is true, but on the face of it we should all be able to agree that it would be a bigoted opinion to express literally, out loud and in public.
(Like the OP is doing)
The title should be different but the meme stands on its own. The clown has built a logical fallacy of why he is lonely. To me this is a jab at incel beliefs and doesn’t have a deeper meaning
maybe people want to talk about the deeper meaning behind the jab . does that make you uncomfortable? there is a nice place called Reddit where you might fit in, if so
Lol, you see how I have been respectful but you are not, it would seem you are the redditor
It’s the 1% vs the working class, not gender vs gender.
This meme is not turning it into a men versus women thing. It’s mocking people who do by calling them clowns.
I don’t buy into this claim at all. There are millions of opportunities to interact with others and make friends. There’s no issue of loneliness at all social level, people just chose to be off-putting enough so as to be lonely
Boys are taught to ignore emotions (“are you crying? Man up!”)
But emotions is what connects humans (and animals for that matter) and can’t really be ignored anyway
Join the two… and you get loneliness, frustration, rage.
We should start a conversation on emotional education (not only for boys but especially for boys)
Because nobody wants men to be emotional. When I started opening up is when my marriage started falling apart lol
Yeah happens even before marriage.
Yeah I ain’t ever showing emotions again except to a paid professional lmao.
Most women want someone very emotionally stable
Lol maybe talk to nicer women?
It’s not a “niceness” thing it’s instinctual
I just want to butt in that while the meme is stupid, most women are not awful either.
No of course they aren’t. Who said they are?
I’m saying women are put off my emotional instability aka “showing your feelings”
That’s so fucking silly
Why? Women want stability and protection usually
You’d be surprised
If opening up is what caused the marriage to fall apart, it was built on a broken foundation and was doomed from the start. You’re only finding out now because emotional unavailability hides that sort of thing.
Yeah as I said… emotional education should not be only for boys.
Sorry mate (or congratulation… depending from the context 🙂)
I think it’s in our nature.
I’ve seen no evidence that these kinds of traits are inherently biological.
Regardless of the fact that we have significant evidence that these more “new” forms of masculinity that incorporate less domineering and aggressive mannerisms are beneficial to men, I simply haven’t seen any evidence that these traits are biological.
In the same way that when you don’t socialize a child to prefer certain clothes or toys, (or stigmatize against them) they generally just go with what they prefer in the moment along lines that don’t match the gender binary, from what I’ve seen, the same is generally true for behaviors. We’re heavily influenced by our cultures and by extension, our upbringing, to a degree that explains why these mannerisms are commonly expressed along gendered lines.
Having kids changed my view. Originally I believed nature influenced our gender roles. Since having kids I have seen in my kids and others that there are clear differences in how both boys and girls interact with the world and both are pretty incredible to watch. I think maybe the idea that being more stoic and less emotional is ok.
Saying all that, there are definitely cultural influences that can take these inherent traits to toxic levels.
I’d like to see studies showing when kids are left to their own that they will trend towards non traditional gender based toys. My gut is believing that this may not need proof that girls and boys do not experience emotions with similar intensity.
One thing I think is a clear difference is attention to details between men and women. What I worry is that if we start thinking men and women are more similar than they are we could run into problems when average people wrongly assume the other experiences things they do.
they generally just go with what they prefer in the moment along lines that don’t match the gender binary
Nope. Lego did a large behavioural study on this because this was their assumption, they thought they were doing completely gender-neutral stuff, but even controlling for parents’s biases their stuff wasn’t gender-neutral when it came to actually be interesting to kids. I’m talking about stuff like the city series, here: A street, bunch of houses, bunch of minifigs. Figures that the girls by and large where looking at the inside of the buildings, finding them empty, and lost interest while boys where seeing the streets, found ample of detail and also a car to drive around, and created stories. There are, of course, as always exceptions to the binary but the overall trend was undeniable.
That (and the insistence of US stores on not having gender-neutral isles and putting Lego in the boy’s section) made them create the Friends series: Detailed house interiors, larger, more detailed minifigs. The pink is for the stores and parents, the interiors for the girls, the build-what-you-want flexibility for the humans.
Generally speaking, I think that difference feminism has been discarded prematurely. Sure, none of the normative BS that many of its proponents espoused should ever see the light of day, but denying difference is harmful in its own way, and the reason is the inevitability of essentialising: If you say “there is no difference at all between men and women” you’re bound to essentialise everyone towards your own gender. And it’s way better to be essentialised as an apple when you’re an apple than it is to be essentialised as a pear.
Do you realise that kids before puberty don’t have much difference from biological point of view. Sexual organs are not developed or fully developed and no hormones to speak of.
The story of Lego you said… cool you can control parents behaviour… what about peer pressure? Or the idea was to control the parents of a whole town (including Cartoons and TV shows)?
Boys develop coarse motor skills first, then fine motor skills, for girls it’s the other way around. Which also means that girls are quite good at sitting still in primary school, boys, without getting tired out in recess, very much aren’t. Cue “behavioural issues”.
Lego did control for everything that could be controlled. They’re the OG “our toys are for everyone” company. They thought that their stuff was gender neutral, that stores and parents, society, were the problem, but had to admit that, no, kids actually do have, statistically speaking, different play preferences. Their female set designers didn’t catch it because they were not kids, any more.
And “no hormones to speak of” MF if there were no hormones involved male karyotypes would develop female.
Lego did a large behavioural study on this because this was their assumption, they thought they were doing completely gender-neutral stuff, but even controlling for parents’s biases their stuff wasn’t gender-neutral when it came to actually be interesting to kids.
Interesting. I can’t seem to find anything on this study, but maybe that’s just my search engine not providing very relevant results.
What is a relevant result is the study from just a few years ago that Lego also commissioned, which they’re using to justify making their product lines more gender neutral, after finding that:
“girls today feel increasingly confident to engage in all types of play and creative activities, but remain held back by society’s ingrained gender stereotypes” and that “Girls […] are more open towards different types of creative play compared to what their parents and society typically encourage.”
And they found a significant effect from parents pushing their kids into certain interests and hobbies influencing the behaviors of children:
Our insights further indicate that girls are typically encouraged into activities that are more cognitive, artistic and related to performance compared to boys who are more likely to be pushed into physical and STEM-like activities (digital, science, building, tools). Parents from this study are almost five times as likely to encourage girls over boys to engage in dance (81% vs. 19%) and dress-up (83% vs. 17%) activities, and over three times as likely to do the same for cooking/baking (80% vs. 20%). Adversely, they are almost four times as likely to encourage boys over girls to engage in program games (80% vs. 20%) and sports (76% vs. 24%) and over twice as likely to do the same when it comes to coding toys (71% vs. 29%)
And they even showed that kids felt pressured not to engage in cross-gendered play, even when they wanted to:
71% of boys vs. 42% of girls say they worry about being made fun of if they play with a toy typically associated for the other gender.
Now, a quick note on your other point.
If you say “there is no difference at all between men and women” you’re bound to essentialise everyone towards your own gender.
I don’t believe there is no difference at all between men and women. I simply believe that a lot of the things we say are inherent differences are actually not as inherent as people tend to believe.
For example, I’ve seen no evidence that women are inherently more kind/caring/empathetic than men in any biological way, only that society socializes them to be so, and thus we see that trend perpetuated over time. Yet if you ask most people, they’ll assume there’s something biological that makes women more like that emotionally.
I don’t believe there is no difference at all between men and women. I simply believe that a lot of the things we say are inherent differences are actually not as inherent as people tend to believe.
Depending on who you mean with “we” I definitely agree.
For example, I’ve seen no evidence that women are inherently more kind/caring/empathetic than men in any biological way, only that society socializes them to be so,
…and fails at doing so, if I may add. Male-pattern aggression is simply more obvious because it’s in your face physical while female-pattern is psychological, always ensuring plausible deniability.
Yet if you ask most people, they’ll assume there’s something biological that makes women more like that emotionally.
Women favour low-risk engagement, passive aggressiveness over overt aggressiveness. Thus you see emotional manipulation used way more often, one approach being self-victim-framing, and for that the narrative of “oh women are so delicate and emotional they have to be protected no matter what they do” fits the bill. Female viciousness is beautiful but I very much prefer it in the “never start a fight, but always finish it” version. Relevant symphonic metal. Also if you’re trying it with me you’re getting tickled into submission.
More sociological insights from the keen minds who teach us you need a small penis to like sports cars.
What?
Anybody can create a meme, but too many people get too much of their “information” from them.
I mean, ok but I’m not really sure what you mean still. Who are you referring to? I mean it could be many people I suppose, but it usually depends on the memes they’re consuming.
lets be honest, people who need a large gender affirming car are fun to laugh at.
need a large gender affirming car
???
This is a projection of your own brainrot sexism, nothing more.
Don’t try to make it sound like you ever mocked a woman for having a large car, either, you’re not fooling anyone with “people”, lol.
oh no, I offended a conservative, the most easily offended demographic.
why don’t you go listen to some podcasts and cry about it
You said something stupid, and it was identified as such. That’s not being offended.
Though the fact that you had to assume several things about me personally to rationalize the way you behave, as your ego is apparently just too fragile to conceive of the possibility that YTA, says a lot, and makes me wonder if you’re available in IMAX.
Not as laughable as the assumption that “needing a large gender affirming car” was the actual reason someone bought a car, without knowing anything about them except that they’re male. Maybe that proves psychic powers are real too!
way to many massive trucks look like they never touched actually work and are used for commute.
no need for that, and truck owners like them because they are manly, so basically gender affirming cars
I think that’s the definition of a straw man. Anyone correct me if I’m wrong.
A better example for a straw man argument would be OPs picture, as it essentially proclaims “all lonely males are just shit people and it’s their fault!”.
if the problem is that men have loneliness issues i have a solution.
it’s men, more than one, become friends.
is there a issue with modern social alienation caused by individual atomisation? yes.
should we focus on it? yes
does it mean that women owe them sex? fuck no,
I’ll add that people aren’t being hugged, & touched enough. Also, infrastructure sucks to encourage socializing
Its an epidemic of that. We are social creatures. That’s our main motto
When we work together, live in groups, etc we all feel better. Reminds us of our tribe days
A big part of human connection is being physical with each other in a chill way. So try to hug your bros more, & get things done as a unit with women!
Both sides are supposed to be allies to each other
the problem is that incels focusing in that problem think that they are owed sex and attention from attractive women. when the real solution of to develop and use third spaces, and develop social connections of any kind.
This was a pivotal video about “nice guys” I watched growing up that imo everyone should watch.
Favorite line:
This is not a transaction where you walk up to the cashier and pull out your nice bucks and buy sex and romance.
Unfortunately, many men think hugging or touching each other is effeminate and gay.
Memes is now shitting on genders ? Y’all fuckers don’t know shit about empathy, and about memes either.
i think its more than just women
