

* embarrassed
* embarrassed
You sound like someone with the word ‘master’ in their online internet name.
it does not follow from the marginalization of the other that every time you experience the marginalization of the other, it is directly connected to genocide. humans are more than ideal atoms, and some of them need to be communicated with in the language of harsh blunt truth.
Men who are unfuckable because of their politics need to man up. If you are spending several hundred words to say: “please integrate a more healthy relationship with masculinity” which is literally just telling them to man up with extra steps that they are uninterested in, you should consider that they are man enough to need to hear: “man up.”
I’m not saying that punishing politically toxic men is trivial, I’m saying it’s worth doing. You can’t make a man change by pandering to him, you have to actually communicate with them directly, or they’ll tune you out.
You are making the mistake of anthropomorphising communities. There are no singular trains of thought here. There are just people of many sorts posting messages for others to read. Full stop.
Yeah ok but you are not immune from having a local culture sorry
leftists of ALL sorts (which is its own entire topic of how freaking diverse that is),
so is it like the subset of leftists that isn’t outright commie?
You seem to be using politics as a cudgel against men instead of attempting to understand the social forces that are creating this problem in the first place.
yes, because using the cudgel is preferable to endlessly theorizing
You can pretend to not understand all you want, but your ignorance won’t be tolerated for long here.
🫡
I don’t have any problem recognizing that, my solution is to tell them they made bad decisions and need to man up.
The solution to a complex system isn’t to fret about how complex it is, it’s to cut the feedback loop.
Weak men who developed toxic politics are caught in a feedback loop. Cut them out of it. Not complicated, just abrasive.
But you can continue constructing your nuanced and sympathetic understanding. These men just need to be understood, that will help them.
“redefining what it means to be strong” is stupid
maybe reconnecting with strength and disparaging weak conceptions of strength
I think you’re funny, spewing your impotent frustration. At least I actually want men to man up.
What is this place anyhow? I get pushback on .world for telling feminists that men’s problems won’t be fixed if they understand the patriarchy harder, and here people are defensive of the notion that politics made some men really shitty.
Did a bunch of lonely men end up here instead of lemmy world?
Mass individual situations are contemplated through generalizations. I’m not interested in every snowflake.
Frankly my positioning on men and feminism is also received negatively on lemmy world. Everyone’s all about extending compassion and sympathy to men as subjects in an attempt to control them. Someone suggested we ‘redefine strength.’ To me strength cannot be redefined: you can only accept that many men are lonely because of their own choices and do, in fact, need to man up.
I think a lot of lonely men do fit that description; studies show that political division is affecting dating. It’s not that complicated.
All Trump supporters who are lonely have some work to do and don’t really deserve sympathy.
Studies show that political division is affecting dating.
The political environment involves a lot of broken weak men who learned broken weak masculinity and that’s affecting dating.
a discussion about masculinity in the present political era with toxic online personalities and toxic politics and you’re upset that Trump gets mentioned? That’s a ‘you’ problem.
Not everything comes down to how men are taught. These men made bad decisions for their cultural and interpersonal growth, and until they stop making those bad decisions, they’re unfuckable, and that’s good.
Don’t settle for weak men, make them man up for you.
Don’t deprive the weak men of their agency. So many Trump toxicity ‘outcomes’ chose this.
* \*