"Your body, my choice" comes from a desperate, pathetic troll. No one is chanting it. It's not representative of what young men believe.
austin-cheney · 1d ago
American culture does an astonishingly horrible job of teaching empathy. Yes, for neurotypical people empathy can be taught just as sociopathic behaviors are often learned.
For me it took entering management in the military to really learn and appreciate empathy as a vital skill.
I really do tire of people with shit empathic abilities trying to Dunning-Kruger it with internalized sympathy. Sympathy does more harm than good at learning empathy. Call that tough love.
c0redump · 1d ago
I liked the article and think it contains some good insights, but there are a few things that left a bad taste in my mouth, and prevented me from fully connecting with the argument being made.
First, there are some platitudes or outright stereotypes that are presented as profound insights, e.g. “men do not connect emotionally as well as women”. Whether this is or is not true is up for debate in the first place, but either way, it’s hardly a novel or interesting statement. Discussing the causal relationships that yield this emergent phenomena, and using that to synthesize a solution, is far more interesting.
Second, these issues primarily affect lower or middle class men and boys. There’s just something off-putting about an Ivy League-educated lawyer and politician, who is not a man, writing op eds about men’s issues and how to address them. Like… what exactly makes her think that she would have any valuable insight that’s not inherently obvious to the median American male? Cynically, I think it may be good for us to have women spearheading this, because it’s politically incorrect for men to raise these issues. That right there illustrates one of the central cultural illnesses that is resulting in the enshittification of men.
But most of all, I find it patronizing that this piece refuses to acknowledge that men have legitimate complaints in some respects. Eg during my undergrad, there was a TA room where students could go for help on CS projects. There was almost always a line down the hall because of the popularity of the major. However, female CS students had their own special TA room, with an equal number of TAs, despite women making up like 10% of the major. For another example, look at the female-exclusive career fairs and resulting employment opportunities, like at GHC. Men and boys see this stuff in front of their face all the time. They know it’s not fair. It’s obvious that it’s not fair. But nobody wants to say it, because you’ll be labeled as all sorts of horrible things. That is emblematic of the core, central issues in our modern gender roles and expectations as they relate to men. And I hate to say it, but IME, these harmful attitudes towards men are primarily perpetuated by women (in particular, the very-online crowd)
BugheadTorpeda6 · 1d ago
It's absolutely good to have women spearheading this issue in my opinion. I don't think that's particularly cynical of you to want at all.
incomingpain · 1d ago
> I see that I was the one who didn’t get it.
Interesting how the article starts. She had a good heart and wanted to help fix a problem, but didnt consider the unintended consequences.
>Boys and men are less likely to turn to their communities for social connection and support. Less likely to go to college. More likely to die by suicide or overdose. Too often, instead of being met with care, they’ve been manipulated and handed division. Not just by podcast bros, but by a government that’s actively stoking the divide for their own political gain.
You're describing an existing divide and the republicans are seeking to help the situation. Why the rapid twist toward government stoking the divide? This is a problem well beyond 1 country.
>And while we’ve been distracted, our boys have been searching for connection and finding it in the worst places. Small men with loud voices who hold court over internet echo chambers, like Andrew Tate, offer them simplistic answers for all of their complicated fears and insecurities. Man up. Toughen up. Win at all costs. And those answers are harming boys and men. We failed to offer them belonging, so they’re grappling for control.
She still doesnt get it. Male relationships are simpler; they thrive on directness, loyalty and honesty. But social media labels that as against the rules.
When social media like reddit went wrong. You get the following problem.
>The issue at hand won’t be solved with better messaging, another podcast, or a new influencer to follow. We are not going to out-algorithm the “manosphere.
You cant out algorithm because you're applying female relationship rules to men and that's never going to work. This attempt to make men follow female rules was hilariously misguided and doomed to fail epicly. You've completely lost any audience on this subject. This is a dead subject for men now.
>We need schools that teach emotional literacy alongside academics. We need public investment in youth mental health. We need a “Men Who Nurse” and a “Guys Who Teach,” pipeline programs that can offer boys real pathways forward in fields that desperately need them.
your idea failed in the marketplace of ideas and your goal is the push it in schools anyway? You dont see the unintended consequences of this?
Men represent like 10% of nursing and 20% of teachers; but i very much doubt those 2 movements ever get the boost your girls who code ever got.
>And we need to tell our boys that the loudest voices with the simplest answers are often the most dangerous. Instead, real power listens, real might is judicious, and real leadership invites doubt. Often, real bravery sounds like, “I don’t know, but let’s figure it out together.”
This is your go-to strategy. Attack the 'manosphere' as dangerous and untrustworthy based on what?
Lets go back to how this started in how she didnt "get it"
She still doesnt get it. That's why Trump is in power and doing some batshit crazy stuff in her country.
Hojojo · 1d ago
I don't really understand any of your comment. Can you explain exactly how to solve all the problems that she's rightfully pointed out? I'm actually not sure what your problem is with what she says.
Or why you think pointing out the toxicity of the manosphere is a bad thing?
You actually didn't provide any arguments for why she's wrong and you didn't provide any better solutions either.
I took away much more from her post than I did your comment. All I see here is somebody who's firmly in the alt right bubble who doesn't like being called out.
BugheadTorpeda6 · 1d ago
I think basically what they are trying to say is that the whole idea that men behave the way they do because of a "lack of education in emotional literacy" or whatever is incorrect. The emotions themselves that bubble to the top between both groups tend to be different and require different responses. A "heart to heart" like you might have with your wife is not necessarily gonna help with your teenage beef between a bunch of insecure young men.
They are saying that relationships between men are different from relationships between women or between men and women, and that they don't necessarily rely on things like emotional intimacy to the same extent, or perhaps that the emotional intimacy experienced doesn't have to be in the form of a very caring heart to heart conversation about feelings.
To be honest, they have a good point in some ways. I think it's true that male friendships are different from women's and it would be basically biologically and culturally impossible to get men to share their feelings as often and in as much detail as women (nor would that necessarily be desirable). But I think there is definitely something to be said for lack of connection between men, and that the original article is correctly identifying a number of very real problems. It's just the whole cliche "men need to cry it out with their bros more" thing that is misguided and not believable to plenty of mature and not frustrated / Andrew Tate watching guys.
I also suspect the whole Andrew Tate thing is really a phenomenon of pre-pubescent and pubescent boys and that it is not nearly as big a problem among, say, people in their 20s. I'd really like to see the statistics on who is watching because I suspect the demographics are like plenty of other "edgy" teenager type shows and that it precipitously drops off once people pass through puberty. My suspicions are mostly driven by the fact I've never heard a man in real life ever mention the guy once and I'm only 28 years old. Certainly, if he had some more broad appeal to men in general, I would have at least heard of it and maybe watched it at least once? I've certainly heard of Joe Rogan for instance, who certainly has a more broad appeal to men more generally.
Young men have always been into a lotta uncouth and kinda shitty stuff like that and I'm not sure they aren't going to grow out of it just like we did with our own "manly man" bullshit back in the day.
incomingpain · 1d ago
>I took away much more from her post than I did your comment. All I see here is somebody who's firmly in the alt right bubble who doesn't like being called out.
As I said go back to read the first part about how she doesnt understand. Just like you just admit dont understand.
Again another label pushed onto others, 'alt right' keep it up. keep dividing and attacking.
>But now, as diversity pipeline programs like the one I've spent my career building are systematically dismantled and women's fundamental rights are rolled back to chants of “your body, my choice,”
Who is winning? The author straight up admits defeat and wants to go after children to push her failed ideas. You know how fast that'll be systematically dismantled if she tried?
Her push for boys who nurse or teach is telling. Will she call out the systemic sexism in those industries? Give men free tuition to become those things? You've never even heard that before have you? My side isnt about attacking like this.
>You actually didn't provide any arguments for why she's wrong and you didn't provide any better solutions either.
My solution is being implemented and is systematically dismantling the problem. It's about rolling back some rights. My body, her choice is what we heard during covid vaccines.
Sorry that i am part of the side that's implementing the solution. What's to argue for?
What happened here is that the republicans should have pushed back against this stuff, but as the quote goes... "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."
msgodel · 1d ago
This might be too late to fix and we're just going to have to find out how it ends.
For me it took entering management in the military to really learn and appreciate empathy as a vital skill.
I really do tire of people with shit empathic abilities trying to Dunning-Kruger it with internalized sympathy. Sympathy does more harm than good at learning empathy. Call that tough love.
First, there are some platitudes or outright stereotypes that are presented as profound insights, e.g. “men do not connect emotionally as well as women”. Whether this is or is not true is up for debate in the first place, but either way, it’s hardly a novel or interesting statement. Discussing the causal relationships that yield this emergent phenomena, and using that to synthesize a solution, is far more interesting.
Second, these issues primarily affect lower or middle class men and boys. There’s just something off-putting about an Ivy League-educated lawyer and politician, who is not a man, writing op eds about men’s issues and how to address them. Like… what exactly makes her think that she would have any valuable insight that’s not inherently obvious to the median American male? Cynically, I think it may be good for us to have women spearheading this, because it’s politically incorrect for men to raise these issues. That right there illustrates one of the central cultural illnesses that is resulting in the enshittification of men.
But most of all, I find it patronizing that this piece refuses to acknowledge that men have legitimate complaints in some respects. Eg during my undergrad, there was a TA room where students could go for help on CS projects. There was almost always a line down the hall because of the popularity of the major. However, female CS students had their own special TA room, with an equal number of TAs, despite women making up like 10% of the major. For another example, look at the female-exclusive career fairs and resulting employment opportunities, like at GHC. Men and boys see this stuff in front of their face all the time. They know it’s not fair. It’s obvious that it’s not fair. But nobody wants to say it, because you’ll be labeled as all sorts of horrible things. That is emblematic of the core, central issues in our modern gender roles and expectations as they relate to men. And I hate to say it, but IME, these harmful attitudes towards men are primarily perpetuated by women (in particular, the very-online crowd)
Interesting how the article starts. She had a good heart and wanted to help fix a problem, but didnt consider the unintended consequences.
>Boys and men are less likely to turn to their communities for social connection and support. Less likely to go to college. More likely to die by suicide or overdose. Too often, instead of being met with care, they’ve been manipulated and handed division. Not just by podcast bros, but by a government that’s actively stoking the divide for their own political gain.
You're describing an existing divide and the republicans are seeking to help the situation. Why the rapid twist toward government stoking the divide? This is a problem well beyond 1 country.
>And while we’ve been distracted, our boys have been searching for connection and finding it in the worst places. Small men with loud voices who hold court over internet echo chambers, like Andrew Tate, offer them simplistic answers for all of their complicated fears and insecurities. Man up. Toughen up. Win at all costs. And those answers are harming boys and men. We failed to offer them belonging, so they’re grappling for control.
She still doesnt get it. Male relationships are simpler; they thrive on directness, loyalty and honesty. But social media labels that as against the rules.
When social media like reddit went wrong. You get the following problem.
>The issue at hand won’t be solved with better messaging, another podcast, or a new influencer to follow. We are not going to out-algorithm the “manosphere.
You cant out algorithm because you're applying female relationship rules to men and that's never going to work. This attempt to make men follow female rules was hilariously misguided and doomed to fail epicly. You've completely lost any audience on this subject. This is a dead subject for men now.
>We need schools that teach emotional literacy alongside academics. We need public investment in youth mental health. We need a “Men Who Nurse” and a “Guys Who Teach,” pipeline programs that can offer boys real pathways forward in fields that desperately need them.
your idea failed in the marketplace of ideas and your goal is the push it in schools anyway? You dont see the unintended consequences of this?
Men represent like 10% of nursing and 20% of teachers; but i very much doubt those 2 movements ever get the boost your girls who code ever got.
>And we need to tell our boys that the loudest voices with the simplest answers are often the most dangerous. Instead, real power listens, real might is judicious, and real leadership invites doubt. Often, real bravery sounds like, “I don’t know, but let’s figure it out together.”
This is your go-to strategy. Attack the 'manosphere' as dangerous and untrustworthy based on what?
Lets go back to how this started in how she didnt "get it"
She still doesnt get it. That's why Trump is in power and doing some batshit crazy stuff in her country.
Or why you think pointing out the toxicity of the manosphere is a bad thing?
You actually didn't provide any arguments for why she's wrong and you didn't provide any better solutions either.
I took away much more from her post than I did your comment. All I see here is somebody who's firmly in the alt right bubble who doesn't like being called out.
They are saying that relationships between men are different from relationships between women or between men and women, and that they don't necessarily rely on things like emotional intimacy to the same extent, or perhaps that the emotional intimacy experienced doesn't have to be in the form of a very caring heart to heart conversation about feelings.
To be honest, they have a good point in some ways. I think it's true that male friendships are different from women's and it would be basically biologically and culturally impossible to get men to share their feelings as often and in as much detail as women (nor would that necessarily be desirable). But I think there is definitely something to be said for lack of connection between men, and that the original article is correctly identifying a number of very real problems. It's just the whole cliche "men need to cry it out with their bros more" thing that is misguided and not believable to plenty of mature and not frustrated / Andrew Tate watching guys.
I also suspect the whole Andrew Tate thing is really a phenomenon of pre-pubescent and pubescent boys and that it is not nearly as big a problem among, say, people in their 20s. I'd really like to see the statistics on who is watching because I suspect the demographics are like plenty of other "edgy" teenager type shows and that it precipitously drops off once people pass through puberty. My suspicions are mostly driven by the fact I've never heard a man in real life ever mention the guy once and I'm only 28 years old. Certainly, if he had some more broad appeal to men in general, I would have at least heard of it and maybe watched it at least once? I've certainly heard of Joe Rogan for instance, who certainly has a more broad appeal to men more generally.
Young men have always been into a lotta uncouth and kinda shitty stuff like that and I'm not sure they aren't going to grow out of it just like we did with our own "manly man" bullshit back in the day.
As I said go back to read the first part about how she doesnt understand. Just like you just admit dont understand.
Again another label pushed onto others, 'alt right' keep it up. keep dividing and attacking.
>But now, as diversity pipeline programs like the one I've spent my career building are systematically dismantled and women's fundamental rights are rolled back to chants of “your body, my choice,”
Who is winning? The author straight up admits defeat and wants to go after children to push her failed ideas. You know how fast that'll be systematically dismantled if she tried?
Her push for boys who nurse or teach is telling. Will she call out the systemic sexism in those industries? Give men free tuition to become those things? You've never even heard that before have you? My side isnt about attacking like this.
>You actually didn't provide any arguments for why she's wrong and you didn't provide any better solutions either.
My solution is being implemented and is systematically dismantling the problem. It's about rolling back some rights. My body, her choice is what we heard during covid vaccines.
Sorry that i am part of the side that's implementing the solution. What's to argue for?
What happened here is that the republicans should have pushed back against this stuff, but as the quote goes... "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."