While there are some points worth discussing in the article, I want to raise an issue with the community itself, since it’s actually fairly adjacent.
If you look through it, majority of posts in the community that calls itself “Men’s Liberation” is really not about, well, men’s liberation. It’s about how men should adapt to the realities of modern feminism, without getting a set at the table to discuss how it affects them and what they would’ve done differently. It just straight up mirrors feminist talking points and rephrases them to have “men” in the name.
Don’t get me wrong: feminism tackles important questions, but it always looks at issues through the women’s perspective, which might miss the unique circumstances men find themselves in and their angle with the issues raised. Since the community claims to come from the men’s side (it’s in the name), I find it deeply disingenuous and concerning.
I mean there is a duality in patriarchy, that each issue that touches on a woman also touches on a man. If you don’t understand how feminism is two halves a whole, and how it is actually a mirror for us to investigate our own masculinity, then I don’t know how to help you on your path to liberation.
If I’m not mistaken, this was the initial concept behind the community, no? The idea that this “manosphere” bullshit is a response to the erasure of men in the misguided attempt to bow to third (fourth now?) wave feminism.
In a nutshell, the plot of feminism got lost in the greater society as a whole finally trying to adopt some of its principles via straight up—fuck I can’t think of the phrase people use—value posturing? Ethics acting? I’m sure you all know the phrase I’m searching for, right wingers popularized it.
But point is, it’s true. And yes, it happens on the white left, but its most devious incarnation is in corporate America. Putting a woman of color in your ad is not equality. Taking aunt jemima off your bottle isn’t erasing racism. It’s just lip service to something akin to progress to boost their bottom line.
So in this world of a bunch of meaningless putting women in the spotlight to say they’ve done it, young men are feeling like they don’t matter. So when you have the liberal world saying “shut up now, a woman is talking,” young men don’t hear “okay, it’s on my generation to take this and smile because there is a long history of women not getting a seat at the table.” Young men hear the most misguided of the fourth wave feminists shouting “men are pigs” and “oh a woman killed her husband? Good, one less man in the world,” and they don’t see much pushback on it. And their brains aren’t fully developed, so they don’t understand that this behavior, in context…well, it’s still very stupid and wrong, but they see society writ large mostly embracing this or laughing it off.
So what do they do? Where do they turn? To the people telling them that women, actually, are the ones who are trash and they need to shut up and get back in the kitchen. Because, to their eye, the world does seem to be trying to go out of its way to “oppress” men. When you hear those fucksticks say “white men are the most oppressed group,” young men don’t understand why that should be laughed off. Because, again, their young brains aren’t developed and hey don’t have centuries of history understood. They hear one side saying “whatever it’s just some white man,” and they hear the other saying “it’s okay to be a man, it’s actually great and you deserve everything.”
Who the fuck do we think they’re gonna listen to?
You could have read the description of community first:
“his community is first and foremost a feminist community for men and masc people,”
But you chose not to which kind of begs the question of you arguing in good faith.
How is giving women a seat at the table taking it away from men?
while vaguely claiming they have power elsewhere
We can go check who is in positions of power around the world if you are inclined to defend this point.
You seem to misunderstand the core concept of feminism, which is not men vs. women it’s people against a specific power structure, which arguably benefits only few while keeping the majority down.
She asked, “Why do men feel so threatened by women and others who are finally getting a seat at the table?”
She admits the competition has increased (and with women making up 50% of the population competition has damn near doubled), and is wondering why men are getting more competitive?
That script says all we need to do is provide for and protect our family. **Yet, the majority of women today also work and provide. **
Which has never been the case in history before, who knew if you give women the same rights and freedoms as men (and added bonuses like DIE to promote them over men) things would break down??
Things are breaking down because women work, not because oligarch are getting insanely greedy and sabotaging democratic structures.
I mean, women do their part to contribute to consumerism.
The main reason why guys want money is so they can be more appealing to women.
that’s patriarchy, which enforces capitalism. that’s not the natural order. that’s how we’re programmed
🥱
Genuinely feels like feminists come here just to argue with men, lol.
Goodbye.
Bro that is Feudalism and Tribalism as well. You’d rather marry your daughter off to a rich man, than a poor one. That’s nothing new to Capitalism. Except women now have the choice to do that themselves.
But that’s not women’s fault, that’s patriarchys fault for instilling into men on a deep cultural level that they need to make money to “provide” and then capitalism exploiting us workers so hard that that “providing” goal is impossible for a lot of us.
A lot of men deal with that insecurity by entering hustle grindset mindsets. Others get taken advantage of by right wing groups and say it’s women’s expectations at fault, not understanding that feminism also combats that expectation.
The point being, patriarchy binds us all, men and women with its expectations, and capitalism has made meeting those expectations impossible for a lot of people resulting in a double wombo combo of fucking men over.
that’s patriarchys fault for instilling into men on a deep cultural level that they need to make money to “provide”
Maybe that’s the case because it’s been the case since bartering started about 100,000 years ago… You’d rather your daughter marry a guy with a lot of stuff, rather than the guy with little stuff. If you think you can “just” change such an ancient system by introducing Feminism, then oh boy, are we even more fucked than I thought…
The only real issue is that Capitalism in the US has gone hogwild and concentrated most wealth down to 3 people. Europe is somewhat doing fine in that regard. Don’t we have superrich people? Yeah, sure, but our bottom line is a LOT healthier. Not as healthy as I wish it to be, but fine-ish for now.
I think this ignores part of the problem some younger guys have expressed which is their perspective partner still expect the guy to earn more and that’s increasingly not the case.
A lot of men have no idea what feminism entails so they aren’t aware that it calls not just for the adjustment in expectations and attitudes for men but for women as well. Clarifying what feminism is could fix a bunch of minor issues.
But that’s not women’s fault,
I think at this point it’s time to take a step back and say “not all women”.
The reaction to “drizzle drizzle” has been particularly telling in this regard: You can scroll through miles of comments of feminists1 trying to analyse the thing as “a movement”, not really knowing what to make of it, where to put it, you can scroll through just as much mileage of “these men are gay” tiktoks from, well, the kind of women drizzle drizzle is taking the piss out of. And you’ll also see reactions from women totally getting it: The ones who can’t help but laugh along. Which is the only way to take this seriously.
The enforcement of patriarchy, or consumerism, whatever you want to call it and however you want to slice it, is not a particularly gendered thing. Just because you belong to an identifiable group doesn’t mean that your actions or opinions are beneficial to that group. That would presume people to not be idiots which is never a safe assumption to make, present company and myself included.
1 “feminist” as in “contains the word feminist in the subreddit name” and suchlike. Not intended to be a deep analysis of the *isms.
I think it’s always important to keep in mind that in any population of people there will be regressives.
I mean, sure. In this context in particularly though what I’m disappointed by is the cluelessness of self-identified feminists: As you yourself said in your other comment the “sprinkle sprinkle” sphere isn’t exactly feminist, going exactly against the adjustments of expectations feminism wants to make among women, then comes along drizzle drizzle to make fun of sprinkle sprinkle, very much in line with feminist thought (though with male humour and camaraderie) and they just don’t get it. Complete woosh.
…or,
<conspiracy_mode=on>, they do get it but play clueless to not have it publicly associated with feminism so that it can be more effective in influencing culture. 1d chess, 4d chess, who can tell the difference.Just to be clear Im not the same poster as the person who mentioned “sprinkle sprinkle”
Nope that was me myself. It’s very much “men should pick up the bill or get lost” type stuff though so I connected it with your “expect to earn more” thing.
Now we just need a strong representative to frame this as populist rhetoric and the left will finally be able to stand on two feet
It’s not their fault insomuch as they can’t think for themselves, I’ll agree with you there.
But the agreement stops when you blame the patriarchy over consumerism. No, this generation has been convinced to sell itself out to the lowest bidder. Average women are proud consumers that want to live like instagram models. Any kind of modesty is shunned in their social circles. It’s drowned out by “look at this new thing I bought! Please praise me for spending money!”
The sex speaks for itself. Men have a ridiculously easy time getting laid if they have money, even if they’re pieces of shit in every other way.
your post is concerning. What most people respond to is confidence and being fun/interesting. When I have previously had trouble getting dates the thing that needed fixing was my attitude NOT my finances.
Keep doing whatever you can to avoid holding women accountable for anything.
That’s how we treat them like children.
Why do you think women aren’t held accountable for anything? That’s silly.
I should also note. The concept you are referring to as “they can’t think for themselves” is called False Consciousness. The idea that oppressive systems like patriarchy and capitalism create this sense that you are acting with complete free will but you actually are following a set of expectations and thoughts and even language that feedback loops on itself in a never ending reinforcement loop.
It’s like, your right at the core of what your saying. There is truth there. But you use such anti women language rather than targeting the systems, ideologies and incentives that make both men and women this way.
complete free will
Hyperbole.
It’s a spectrum, for sure. I wouldn’t be who I am without the influence of others.
That said, women are way more likely to go along with what the crowd (their peers) is doing than I am. If they disagree with the crowd, they are way less likely to put those disagreements into action than I am.
They cannot think for themselves and it’s encouraged by those who refuse to acknowledge it. It’s not a problem unique to women, but they suffer from it more than men because women have been conditioned to operate as one unit.
Have you talked to a therapist that specializes in cognitive behavioral therapy about your views here? You might be happier in the long run if you do.
I can tell you’re upset because I’m saying things you don’t like. It’s okay, I see it all the time and don’t expect more from you people on these forums.
Goodbye. Easy block.
You’re displaying really obvious signs of distress. You aren’t coming across as mentally healthy.
Brother, you are right now repeating the most common, basic and wrong male anti feminist talking points as you talk about how women are so baby brained that they can’t think.
It ain’t hyperbole. It’s academic theory. You are so caught up in not using the word you don’t like. I am telling you that you don’t know what that word means. I explain what it means. You then repeat “no” and then say the same thing but in a misogynist lens.
There’s even non misogynist ways to explain the “operating as one unit” borg brain you are talking about. It’s just the women’s side of patriarchy. That’s a built in function of patriarchy. You have a hard time seeing that because you are not a woman and have a flawed concept of the word patriarchy. Do you get what I’m saying?
as you talk about how women are so baby brained that they can’t think.
Saying it’s an ‘anti-feminist’ talking point holds no water when we’re describing reality. You’re literally supporting my argument by saying that women can’t rise above the expectations the patriarchy has put on them. They can’t think for themselves.
You’re also supporting my notion that you refuse to acknowledge greed and consumerism as being the root cause of these issues because you’re so distracted and invested in blaming “the patriarchy.”
It’s a lot easier for women to blame “the patriarchy,” because if they addressed their own greed then they would have to give something up. If all the blame is put on “the patriarchy,” then women can continue to consume just as they always have and delude themselves into thinking they’re not part of the problem.
It’s just the women’s side of patriarchy.
Now this is an interesting point to bring up, although it does reinforce my argument. Men are more likely to value autonomy, women are more likely to value homogeny. It’s why I said that women have a harder time thinking for themselves than men and why they’ve been conditioned to operate as one unit.
None of this is up for debate and you haven’t disproved any of my points. Even if these ideas aren’t acceptable in our social circles, it doesn’t mean they don’t describe reality.
Stop trying to look good in front of your peers.
You come across as if you never considered that your persoective is just that amd isn’t an unbiased reflection of reality.
When people talk about the patriarchy they are talking about the inherent sexism within society that creates all of the issues you are complaining about.
Look. We are talking in circles. So let me leave you off with a quote from one of the most famous feminist writers, Bell Hooks.
It is obvious that many women have appropriated feminism to serve their own ends, especially those white women who have been at the forefront of the movement; but rather than resigning myself to this appropriation I choose to re-appropriate the term ‘feminism’, to focus on the fact that to be ‘feminist’ in any authentic sense of the term is to want for all people, female and male, liberation from sexist role patterns, domination, and oppression. – Ain’t I A Woman: Black Women and Feminism, 1981
Like I said. You are stuck in a mind loop called a false consciousness. I was unable to break you out of it this conversation. I hope that this conversation is a seed in your brain that someday, someone else more able to speak your language waters and sprouts into understanding.
Please understand. You are not talking about “women”. You are talking about patriarchy. You are complaining about patriarchy. You are complaining about women who are also stuck in the same patriarchy false consciousness as you are, but from the other side. Your talk about women and greed is a complex intersection of patriarchy and capitalism. They effect each other and support each other.
I genuinely hope you take that extra step towards understanding and abandon your misogynist lens. It is doing more harm to you than you know.
You are still just complaining about the intersection of patriarchy and capitalism. What you are saying is feminist theory. We are still in agreement here, though I disagree with the way you word it.
For example. You say that the average women wants to live like Instagram models. You are right, but that is due to patriarchy creating the cultural expectations that men are unable to meet in the modern world due to capitalisms squeeze. It is women simply trying to meet their side of the expectation.
Feminism is in part about how patriarchy binds both genders by expectations. People generally focus on the way it binds women. However it fucks men over as well. We are expected to have money, we are expected to “provide” weather in the classical sense of a family or in the modern sense of just having the money to meet consumerist whims, it doesn’t really matter which one your talking about, it’s still patriarchy.
When patriarchy is normally discussed it’s about how men are privileged and women are oppressed. And while even as a, as the incels like to say, “low value man” you do have some societal privileges, it is very often ignored that patriarchy oppresses us men as well for not meeting those expectations. In this case, having money. Which we don’t because capitalism funnels money into fewer and fewer hands, making fewer and fewer men able to achieve those expectations.
I hope I explained this well and didn’t talk in too many circles. Like I said. Wombo combo of capitalism and patriarchy that tag team to fuck over men.
You are right, but that is due to patriarchy creating the cultural expectations
This is where we disagree, and it’s not just the words that we use. Women are greedy, too. They like the nice things men buy them. They don’t care about the true cost of consumerism because they’ve been conditioned to ignore it.
It is women simply trying to meet their side of the expectation.
This is why I agree with you insomuch as women aren’t able to think for themselves. I don’t put that expectation on them. People richer than us do. Even though I’m able to rise above their influence, the average person cannot. This goes doubly-so for women because women have been encouraged for generations to function as one entity as much as possible.
That’s still not disagreeing with me though. You are agreeing fundamentally with what I am saying, but you don’t understand what the words mean. You have a false consciousness of your own that is at this moment blocking you from understanding what mean by “patriarchy”.
The only difference in what we are saying is that you don’t know the big fancy words and theory backing it up and instead replace it with anti women language that you have picked up and understood. At the core, past the language and operating on pure ideas, we are saying the same thing.
It is disagreeing, though. You’re saying that women can’t rise above the expectations put on them by “the patriarchy.” I agree that women, on average, cannot think for themselves.
It’s not the fault of the patriarchy that women like expensive things and are willing to reward males who buy them things with sex. Women themselves encourage this behavior.
Trying to absolve them of any responsibility is just contributing to the culture of treating women like children.
With attitudes like I see you displaying, I wouldn’t sleep with you either. Listen to yourself and the words you use. That’s not thinking for yourself, that’s focusing on perceived others’ faults in order to take zero responsibility for own faults.
That’s not what I am saying. Women and men can rise above those expectations. It’s called feminism.
Wrong, you just described patriarchy. You do not know what that word means. You understand it as “men good, women bad”. You described an aspect of patriarchy as it effects both women’s expectations of men and men’s expectations of women.
Of course everyone is responsible for their own actions. However when discussing the way a group of people, especially such a wide one as half the population, you use terms that accurately describe the ideologies at work rather than the group itself. Because to do so builds stereotypes and reinforces false consciousness related to that group. In your case, you are stuck in the male patriarchal false consciousness that is clouding your ability to see that we are saying the same thing.
Women themselves encourage this behavior.
The women whose minds are also enslaved to the patriarchy encourage this. Sounds like we’re saying the same thing
I hate none of the three.
Not sure why you’re being downvoted for a difference in opinion, I think we should try to converse with people who have different views, lest we are just an echo chamber.
With that in mind, do you support the current version of capitalism which is very laissez faire? Or are you in favour of the system if it is regulated more than we do now.
He’s being down voted because he had an uninformed and uncritical response to a valid point. Not because of a difference in opinion but because he entered a conversation with the sole intent of saying “not me”, clearly showing he didn’t even begin to engage in any way with the topic.
It is disingenuous to call it a difference in opinion.
However, conversation is good, and I appreciate your attempt at getting him to put some more thought into the topic. It’s something I need to be better at myself rather than being snippy.
In that spirit of conversation I do wanna say that I think focusing on different versions of capitalism misses the point of the topic as well. It isn’t about laissez faire vs more regulated systems. It’s that the incentives regardless of the specific system of capitalism seek to squeeze wealth out of every orifice. It’s a constant struggle between the oppressed being squeezed and the squeezers doing the squeezing.
What does this have to do with feminism and whatnot? Well you see, due to the endless squeezing, men have lost the ability to do the thing they have been told their whole life to do. Provide. This has happened at the same time as women and LGBT rights becoming more and more equal. Due to this, many right wing groups prey on men’s insecurity with their lack of ability to “provide” and blame that changing world on the fact women and queer folk are more open and equal.
As if putting women in the kitchen and queer folk in the closet will revert the economic status of those men back to the time when women were forced to be in the kitchen and queer folk were forced in the closet.
This is the topic. To say to all that “I don’t hate capitalism” is to fundamentally not understand the topic at all. Conversation is good, but to conversate we need to have a common topic and a common language to communicate ideas about that topic. A language that the person you replied to does not have as shown by his non-understanding of what was even said.
This is called a false consciousness. It’s a natural outcome to oppressive systems to take people within it and give them a language incompatible with people outside of that same false consciousness. Conversation becomes difficult because what I mean by capitalism and what he means by capitalism are fundamentally different.
Both I and the article are using the academic meaning. Meanwhile he thinks we mean like, Owning a house as capitalism.
As I said before, I need to be better at engaging people and being less snippy and just pointing and saying “your wrong and here’s why”. Meeting people where they are is my goal but I’m not quite there.
Anyways, good luck with your attempt. Sorry that I talked so much. Please take it with genuine love that I want to give it with.
Thanks for the reply. I will respond to this at some point today, just a little busy right now and don’t want you to think I just ignored your insightful response.
Take your time. Ill be here, willing to talk the best I can.
Then you don’t know what capitalism is.
Or perhaps I just think differently than you.
Let me try this again in light of trying to meet you where you are at instead of just saying “wrong” and moving on.
What do you think the article meant by its title? What do you think it ment by “capitalism” so we can be on the same page.
Am I needed in this discussion? I thought that you can read my mind when you’re so confidently educating me about my own views.
Or just try not to be on the same page at all. Also okay.
Probably both.
I do not think it’s worth acknowledging a difference in opinion when the problem at its core is the difference in what those words mean. I don’t think we have a difference in opinion. I think he does not know what I or the article mean. If someone could just find the words to tell him in a way he understands then I feel we would be surprised to see that no disagreement existed in the first place.
Now to find the words…
You think differently because you don’t understand what you are thinking about. You think you do, but you don’t. It’s called false consciousness. Which our world is full of as oppressive systems such as capitalism naturally make use of false consciousness.
This is to say, you don’t know what capitalism is.
Perhaps. It’s also possible you’re confusing capitalism with a market economy in general. Market economies are pretty useful, but capitalism in particular generates massive wealth inequality.
I don’t hate capitalism, it’s better than feudalism, and the human race’s attempts at communism have failed so spectacularly descending into absolute tyranny and corruption putting the sins of capitalism to shame. I also don’t hate women, or feminism, there are some women I hate, but it’s an individual judgement.
Capitalism is that abusive boyfriend that keeps bringing up your super abusive ex so you know how lucky you are to have him.
Capitalism is feudalism with rule by grace of money instead of grace of god. Don’t confuse it with having a market economy, especially a well-regulated one: Capitalism is when there’s unbridled capital accumulation, unbridled accumulation of economical and political power. Capitalism is when the 0.1% exist and, in the broader sense, capitalism is that set of memes which infect the majority to put up with that nonsense.
Found the stockholm syndrome victim.
Complete BS. There are socialist countries currently doing just fine.
Which ones and please don’t name a nation with a stock exchange.
For example? Also socialism != communism
If you think communism put capitalisms sins to shame then you don’t know what capitalism has done.
I think the point is that unbridled capitalism is creating increasing wealth inequality that many straight, white men are feeling but aren’t accurately attributing to their being on the losing end of wealth inequality. This could be ameliorated with any number of policies in a capitalist system, such as a more progressive tax code, better labor protections, or universal healthcare, but the US employs none of these, and straight, white men are largely blaming women, immigrants, and LGBTQ people instead of the class of people keeping them poor.
It’s not just the US that is feeling this.
Yes, but this article is about the US specifically. There’s also a global right-wing propaganda machine contributing to this problem
Fair.
How is capitalism different?
It’s not you’re just biased.
We hate Babylon, actually, and all the stupid things that money makes people do to each other because they forgot what it means to actually live as a real person in the real world, instead of chasing clout inside systems designed to ensure the house always wins, regardless of which banner it happens to be flying today, be it feminist, Marxist, capitalist, socialist, or whatever other asinine idea people who produce nothing real come up with to explain why someone else is to blame for the shit state of affairs.
And no, we very definitely do not hate women. We do very much hate what this shitty world turns women into, which is why we have worked ourselves to death to protect them from it in past generations. But that peace was broken, and now there’s going to be hell to pay.
You hate “what women are turned into”???
What a pathetic excuse. Shameful, even.
Unfortunately, the homogenization of women works against them when they’re all conditioned to be proud consumers living vicariously through those richer than them.
Yes, I do hate petty, spiteful people who have become so bitter with the world that they lash out at everything and everyone they touch. It happens to men too, and there’s absolutely no shame in hating to see it happen to good people.
What is this community about? I have read the sidebar, but I have not understand it…
As an outsider: “Feminism for men”. It currently exists as a counter to Men’s Rights, which was a movement deemed “too problematic” by the Feminists. Whether it is too problematic is something I’ll leave up to the reader. I for one think they’re just really good at trolling (and sometimes they were assholes).
Put simply, this is a community dedicated to criticism of the gendered constraints placed on men.
I’ve seen exactly one post from here and if I had to hazard a guess I would say it’s just another Tankie trap trying to fool dimwits into subterfuge while simultaneously embodying all the evils they claim to oppose.
Why would you guess when you can look at the other posts?
Then click into the community and look at the other posts instead of making assumptions.
Wow great read
