A scholar identifies an alarming trend among US men.

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
37,360
17,566
146
Just more of the usual broken brain Conservativism, project project project. He is what he demonizes. And yet, instead of recognizing that, him, and all the other RWNJ like him, instead view that as validating themselves. Its all the rest of the world that has broken brains, not him, despite him regularly shitting all over his own points, often in the exact post where he made them.



Well that is like 98% of Moonbeam posts, so was anyone surprised?

I don’t know if I’d chalk Moonie up as a RWNJ. However, he has certainly shown his ego is still in full force, and he’s got some emotional attachment to firearms. There’s some similarities, but I don’t take Moonie as a storming the castle for trump kinda person
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
37,360
17,566
146
The topic is interesting.

The personal attacks not so much :/

Yes, the topic is interesting!

Personally, reviewing the OP, IMO the despair is related to purpose (not to over simplify though). For human history, people have shown to require purpose to feel self worth. Automation shouldn't remove the purpose people feel, but it does. I see this as we (society) shun and criticize those who want to give new purpose, because it doesn't measure up to our live-to-work mentality. I mean, you must be a slacker if you only work 20 hours a week.

Solution: UBI & 100% publicly funded universities, encourage pursuits to make you happy, higher education, and definitely encourage community involvement.

Guess what the U.S.A. aristocracy isn't going to allow though...
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
34,542
26,825
136
Why do you think it's not right? I know very well you believe capitalism doesn't work without regulation same as me. Are you on board with the idea that the suffering that blue collar workers have experienced to their self respect since the late seventies is due to some genetic defect?
Well, you say it isn't, but I'm pretty certain in many situations it is due to genetic differences. Genetics factor into intelligence for example, and people with lower intelligence typically rely on blue-collar jobs. They are less able to adapt when their job is no longer necessary, and they are less able to predict which jobs will not be necessary in the near future.

Jobs being replaced by automation isn't the problem. The problem is that the increased productivity isn't spread around to benefit all of society and instead is being hoarded by a small group of greedy fucks. UBI and M4A would take care of "their livelihoods" along with a host of other problems. People who still "need to work" in order to feel useful can then work on whatever they want whenever they feel the need.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ch33zw1z

biostud

Lifer
Feb 27, 2003
17,858
4,222
136
Yes, the topic is interesting!

Personally, reviewing the OP, IMO the despair is related to purpose (not to over simplify though). For human history, people have shown to require purpose to feel self worth. Automation shouldn't remove the purpose people feel, but it does. I see this as we (society) shun and criticize those who want to give new purpose, because it doesn't measure up to our live-to-work mentality. I mean, you must be a slacker if you only work 20 hours a week.

Solution: UBI & 100% publicly funded universities, encourage pursuits to make you happy, higher education, and definitely encourage community involvement.

Guess what the U.S.A. aristocracy isn't going to allow though...

A well educated population will generate more wealth and prosperity seen as a long term investment, and just like healthcare the most cost efficient way to do so is through tax/state regulated programs. But the state and taxes are apparently always bad and inefficient to some.

But I guess this is a discussion for another thread.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
37,360
17,566
146
A well educated population will generate more wealth and prosperity seen as a long term investment, and just like healthcare the most cost efficient way to do so is through tax/state regulated programs. But the state and taxes are apparently always bad and inefficient to some.

But I guess this is a discussion for another thread.

this is exactly the thread for this discussion 😉

it cannot be repeated enough, there are ways to help society, but the general populace is barraged by BS to keep us squabbling while money is funneled to the top .01%

the people this impacts the most, negatively, have been gas lighted into thinking this is the best thing for them and it’s the evil progression of society that is the problem. While much of what we see today has been orchestrated for decades by the same .01%
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
19,879
18,325
136
Mooonbeam is no conservative, but he has been falling a bit for some of the right wing agitprop as we see with some of the wording in his post. It's true that there are struggles for people in this society, but for white males the battle is not men vs women as he paints it here, but rather the rich against the less well off. He is just helping the right by framing it as a gender battle when it's really a tale as old as time, an economic battle of the haves vs have nots which use cultural issues like race, ethnicity, sexuality and gender to distract and appeal to the evil instincts in humans so they don't see how they are really eating all the pie and leaving them crumbs. Hey it's not us here that are running the show that have always exploited your labor and constantly vote for things that go against your economic interests, its those damn democrat feminazis that are favoring women over you! Or the hispanics against your whitness! Or the blacks against your whiteness! Or the Dems are too much for the gays!

It's sad to see him fall for this trap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cytg111 and Pohemi

Sunburn74

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2009
5,003
2,568
136
All I know is that if some of a kind have it good then it can't be true that others of that kind can't be having it bad. Simple logic right? And besides there were statistics quoted in the OP that rate the number of suicides men vs women that obviously can't be factual, right?
Moonbeam, I think the suicide statistics don't tell the whole story about how well men are doing. I bet if you look back at suicide statistics in the 1930s-1950s the alleged golden age of men things were basically the same. Slight increases in both groups over time but the ratio about the same at 3.5 male to female.


Male suicide rates just isn't a good metric to track when it comes to assessing overall how men are doing socially. Suicide just has too many confounding factors. I'd track quality of life scores, perception of happiness, markers of good health, financial stability (can you handle a 1000 dollar emergency? Can you take 2 months off work if you break your leg and be ok?), things like that. Men (as compared to women) are doing just fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
71,774
5,851
126
This, uh...none of this is right. I say that as someone who believes capitalism needs some serious adjustments.
I posted this thread because I think it contains advise that liberals need to hear, that the struggles of men in US society as indicated by statistics point to many areas where men are failing more than women are. Men are not genetically inferior to women, in my opinion, at least not in the areas we are discussing here. The relationship to IQ and jobs, adaptability to retraining, etc will apply to women as much as they will to men. So all of the things that you describe are true but they are not the point.

If the statistics are factual and men are failing at a greater rate than women in the areas the OP talked about, the author's point and mine was to point to the missed opportunity that political parties have missed in a failure to redress them. All the solutions you describe are valid in my opinion, but the issue is selling them.

The author suggests that Democrats do not emphasize their programs benefit men as much or more than women because they do not want to alienate women who might feel that implies gender discrimination. He puts the same blame of conservatives for other reasons but I was not trying to speak to them.

Now a failure to address stresses in society produced by change in economic conditions that has proven to affect men more than women, if true. than, ipso facto, becomes a gender issue and a gender issue easily becomes a political one.

So, if liberals are failing to announce the fact that their policies benefit men and perhaps also benefit them even more than they benefit women, a reluctance to campaign on that fact misses an opportunity to appeal to those supposedly disaffected men. A fear of appearing gender biased toward men, a trait I believe is apparent in certain subgroups of liberal politics, may spell lost elections in my opinion, and especially so because grievance is so politically malleable.

The solutions you suggest to fix capitalism are all valid in my opinion.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
22,347
12,088
136
Mooonbeam is no conservative, but he has been falling a bit for some of the right wing agitprop as we see with some of the wording in his post. It's true that there are struggles for people in this society, but for white males the battle is not men vs women as he paints it here, but rather the rich against the less well off. He is just helping the right by framing it as a gender battle when it's really a tale as old as time, an economic battle of the haves vs have nots which use cultural issues like race, ethnicity, sexuality and gender to distract and appeal to the evil instincts in humans so they don't see how they are really eating all the pie and leaving them crumbs. Hey it's not us here that are running the show that have always exploited your labor and constantly vote for things that go against your economic interests, its those damn democrat feminazis that are favoring women over you! Or the hispanics against your whitness! Or the blacks against your whiteness! Or the Dems are too much for the gays!

It's sad to see him fall for this trap.

Its like - in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king - kind of thing. Guess who’s got the eye and who blind in that equation? Also if we follow his and petersons teachings we will magically be able to talk conservatives off the he plank and by understanding them we will stop fearing them in a way that magically is gonna stop creating more of what we….. fear. So really its all your fault.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iRONic and Pohemi

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
71,774
5,851
126
I don’t know if I’d chalk Moonie up as a RWNJ. However, he has certainly shown his ego is still in full force, and he’s got some emotional attachment to firearms. There’s some similarities, but I don’t take Moonie as a storming the castle for trump kinda person

Perhaps darksordsman needs imagine himself up against truly monstrous people in order to justify the savage vituperation he loves to indulge in. Sadly, while beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I think that ugly people can't help but seeing ugliness.

I have an emotional attachment to the right of self defense. Ask yourself if someone you loved were shot in front of your eyes, someone you could have saved had you been armed, if you could go back and re-experience the event, would you take a gun? Would you let anybody talk you out of doing so knowing that the loved one who died would not die the second time round? My attachment to arms is just that simple. But even thought conceal carry should not have become easier in California via the recent Supreme Court ruling, I still have done nothing to obtain a permit. It still requires the completion of firearms training which for me I find inconvenient. So I go around unarmed like most people in my state. Not sufficiently emotionally attached to the notion of self defense, I guess. Maybe someday.
 

Pohemi

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2004
7,731
8,746
146
I have an emotional attachment to the right of self defense. Ask yourself if someone you loved were shot in front of your eyes, someone you could have saved had you been armed, if you could go back and re-experience the event, would you take a gun?
You only see shootings because you were raised to believe that killing was wrong. The suspect was simply put down as a child, and it's YOU who cannot understand and be compassionate towards them that makes you believe you see violence, when it is really just the natural cycle of your loved one rejoining the Earth. It's your fault for not loving enough. You could have prevented it by not contributing to a society that is asleep and puts down every last one of the children.

You don't need guns, you need more love.

:rolleyes:
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
37,360
17,566
146
Perhaps darksordsman needs imagine himself up against truly monstrous people in order to justify the savage vituperation he loves to indulge in. Sadly, while beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I think that ugly people can't help but seeing ugliness.

I have an emotional attachment to the right of self defense. Ask yourself if someone you loved were shot in front of your eyes, someone you could have saved had you been armed, if you could go back and re-experience the event, would you take a gun? Would you let anybody talk you out of doing so knowing that the loved one who died would not die the second time round? My attachment to arms is just that simple. But even thought conceal carry should not have become easier in California via the recent Supreme Court ruling, I still have done nothing to obtain a permit. It still requires the completion of firearms training which for me I find inconvenient. So I go around unarmed like most people in my state. Not sufficiently emotionally attached to the notion of self defense, I guess. Maybe someday.

wrong, you cared about silencing your firearm. That’s not required for self defense. And when it comes down to it, a firearm isn’t required for self defense either.
 

biostud

Lifer
Feb 27, 2003
17,858
4,222
136
I posted this thread because I think it contains advise that liberals need to hear, that the struggles of men in US society as indicated by statistics point to many areas where men are failing more than women are. Men are not genetically inferior to women, in my opinion, at least not in the areas we are discussing here. The relationship to IQ and jobs, adaptability to retraining, etc will apply to women as much as they will to men. So all of the things that you describe are true but they are not the point.

If the statistics are factual and men are failing at a greater rate than women in the areas the OP talked about, the author's point and mine was to point to the missed opportunity that political parties have missed in a failure to redress them. All the solutions you describe are valid in my opinion, but the issue is selling them.

The author suggests that Democrats do not emphasize their programs benefit men as much or more than women because they do not want to alienate women who might feel that implies gender discrimination. He puts the same blame of conservatives for other reasons but I was not trying to speak to them.

Now a failure to address stresses in society produced by change in economic conditions that has proven to affect men more than women, if true. than, ipso facto, becomes a gender issue and a gender issue easily becomes a political one.

So, if liberals are failing to announce the fact that their policies benefit men and perhaps also benefit them even more than they benefit women, a reluctance to campaign on that fact misses an opportunity to appeal to those supposedly disaffected men. A fear of appearing gender biased toward men, a trait I believe is apparent in certain subgroups of liberal politics, may spell lost elections in my opinion, and especially so because grievance is so politically malleable.

The solutions you suggest to fix capitalism are all valid in my opinion.

Fascism is fueled from men (and women) who believe that some antagonist is trying to ruin their life, and they have to rise and fight that antagonist, not realizing those in the top of a fascist regime reaps the fruits from the from the poor, while they sacrifice their life in a battle that is unwinable as the antagonist is a ghost of their imagination.

But how do you realize that fascism has taken root in your political system?
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
71,774
5,851
126
Mooonbeam is no conservative, but he has been falling a bit for some of the right wing agitprop as we see with some of the wording in his post. It's true that there are struggles for people in this society, but for white males the battle is not men vs women as he paints it here, but rather the rich against the less well off. He is just helping the right by framing it as a gender battle when it's really a tale as old as time, an economic battle of the haves vs have nots which use cultural issues like race, ethnicity, sexuality and gender to distract and appeal to the evil instincts in humans so they don't see how they are really eating all the pie and leaving them crumbs. Hey it's not us here that are running the show that have always exploited your labor and constantly vote for things that go against your economic interests, its those damn democrat feminazis that are favoring women over you! Or the hispanics against your whitness! Or the blacks against your whiteness! Or the Dems are too much for the gays!

It's sad to see him fall for this trap.

Yes, I am not a conservative and yes, the battle is not between genders, and yes there is an issue between the haves and the have-nots. As you must surely know by now the issue for me is always the same. Humanity is asleep, unable to face the fact that there is only one real enemy, the self we imagine ourselves to be. All hate has its origin in self hate and self hate is inevitable, the product of the language of duality. There here is an escape from this condition, enlightenment or realization, something different, a different way of seeing, something that can't be given to others or even properly named, something that involves a personal change of perspective of consciousness, a mystery.

Humanity had a great problem. The realization that can save it from an unconscious will for extinction feels like dying to experience. Nobody wants to know that they hate themselves because they were made to feel that self hatred via violence and put downs in childhood. You know the story. You also deny it is true. That denial is your real enemy and it includes the denial that you are in a state of denial. That is where I began.

I started this thread by attacking liberals as lady men, effeminate supporters of feminazis, enablers of gender politics that bash men, girly men and pussies. Why, because you will react to that just as my theory predicts, with denial and contempt. I personally have no problem with women or women's right to equality. I object to gender identity politics, however because they divide gender against gender. As long as Democrats show a bias against men who dominate the power structures of our society and that bias trickles down to have not men, the appearance of gender politics in the Democratic party will remain effective as a political tool of the right.

I believe that Democrats fail to properly message and my criticism of the left isn't to run them down. That is the very thing that people suspect that criticism is intended to do when they are under the effects of unconscious self contempt. Rational minds look at criticism constructively. Self haters turn everything to shit. This is what I see and what I hope to share.

In short, one way to provoke people into revealing their defensiveness is to poke them in where they are blind to their innate defensiveness. If you call an enlightened person a feminazi who knows he or she isn't, you don't get a big reaction of protest. Sacred cow provocations bring out the Spanish Inquisition.

I read long ago that you don't want to poke a hornets nest unless you don't mind a sting.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pohemi

Pohemi

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2004
7,731
8,746
146
All hate has its origin in self hate and self hate is inevitable, the product of the language of duality. ...

... You also deny it is true. That denial is your real enemy and it includes the denial that you are in a state of denial. That is where I began.
'Chicken or the egg' word salad.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
71,774
5,851
126
Fascism is fueled from men (and women) who believe that some antagonist is trying to ruin their life, and they have to rise and fight that antagonist, not realizing those in the top of a fascist regime reaps the fruits from the from the poor, while they sacrifice their life in a battle that is unwinable as the antagonist is a ghost of their imagination.

But how do you realize that fascism has taken root in your political system?
The belief that you mentioned is fear, the fear that some other will get unfair advantage in a comparative scenario like under-regulated capitalism. The ghost is the fear. We create what we fear and everything that we fear has already happened. Fear is the fear of fear itself. Psychologically, fear is treated by going in the direction of your fear, facing the nothing that isn't there. Psychoanalytically, feeling ones fears will progress from depression to sadness to anger and then to rage. At that point feelings can become so strong that a breakthrough is possible. One can begin to feel that rage to be a protection against feeling grief. Once one begins to grieve one becomes real. Grief is the act of self pity that leads to acceptance and self healing. It will carry with it the original experience of loss and separation form our original whole being. To feel is to live. We do not know what we feel because of fear.

I suppose you can judge how deeply fascism has taken root by the level of altered reality people need to create to keep themselves from feeling what they feel, that they were made to hate themselves as children. But the way I judge thing is different than the way I think most people do. I do not trust that people distinguish between judgement and judgmentalism owing to the projection of self hate. I won the war against the Nothing by becoming a nobody. I could not prove that all my sacred cows were actually real to anybody. At first that cost me belief in everything. Then I discovered what remains to a person who has suffered a shipwreck. That is a mystery I can't explain.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
71,774
5,851
126
'Chicken or the egg' word salad.
A zen master once said: Before I began the journey mountains were mountains. But down the road mountains were not mountains anymore. When I arrived at my destination mountains had become mountains again.

Perhaps for you mountains are not mountains. The path to truth can be sensed as being near when one faces seemingly irreconcilable paradox. So what confuses you does not confuse me. There is no chicken and egg. Those are words that create a division that does not exist. They are memories of the past put into words. For the Zen master there is no chicken or egg salad, there is just the joy of a dining experience. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
71,774
5,851
126
wrong, you cared about silencing your firearm. That’s not required for self defense. And when it comes down to it, a firearm isn’t required for self defense either.
Ah, yes I would care about silencing my firearm if I were ever to work up the effort to go and shoot one, but that is only because I would rather enjoy the world at a place to shoot without having to not be able to hear it naturally. I would prefer, also to keep the noise down to keep others from being disturbed the the sound of guns. Others are unable to see the love of life I feel or know how deeply I care about them as living things. It's a matter of personal joy and a compassion for others. Naturally, you don't want to go around saying things like I just did because people worry about others in all kinds of ways. God knows, I could be a delusional narcissist, with holy-man syndrome or worse yet, hoping to be able to shoot you while you sleep and not wake anybody else in the house, no? Anyway, I figure it likely that if I ever get killed by a bullet I will be dead before I hear it so I guess I'm not going to worry myself whether it is silenced or not.
 

Hans Gruber

Golden Member
Dec 23, 2006
1,999
1,003
136
I used the term Sieg Highheal to cause you to react defensively to the notion you would make a perfect Amazon slave and I did that to indicate that you are a spineless man and I did that to show you you don’t like seeing yourself like that. We can never get anywhere so long as you see a mirror and react to it as though you are being called the monster only you see in it.

The belief that you mentioned is fear, the fear that some other will get unfair advantage in a comparative scenario like under-regulated capitalism. The ghost is the fear. We create what we fear and everything that we fear has already happened. Fear is the fear of fear itself. Psychologically, fear is treated by going in the direction of your fear, facing the nothing that isn't there. Psychoanalytically, feeling ones fears will progress from depression to sadness to anger and then to rage. At that point feelings can become so strong that a breakthrough is possible. One can begin to feel that rage to be a protection against feeling grief. Once one begins to grieve one becomes real. Grief is the act of self pity that leads to acceptance and self healing. It will carry with it the original experience of loss and separation form our original whole being. To feel is to live. We do not know what we feel because of fear.

I suppose you can judge how deeply fascism has taken root by the level of altered reality people need to create to keep themselves from feeling what they feel, that they were made to hate themselves as children. But the way I judge thing is different than the way I think most people do. I do not trust that people distinguish between judgement and judgmentalism owing to the projection of self hate. I won the war against the Nothing by becoming a nobody. I could not prove that all my sacred cows were actually real to anybody. At first that cost me belief in everything. Then I discovered what remains to a person who has suffered a shipwreck. That is a mystery I can't explain.
What you are doing is known as intellectualizing. That is a defense mechanism. Using logic, reason and philosophy to justify the state of mind or situation a person finds themselves in.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
71,774
5,851
126
You only see shootings because you were raised to believe that killing was wrong. The suspect was simply put down as a child, and it's YOU who cannot understand and be compassionate towards them that makes you believe you see violence, when it is really just the natural cycle of your loved one rejoining the Earth. It's your fault for not loving enough. You could have prevented it by not contributing to a society that is asleep and puts down every last one of the children.

You don't need guns, you need more love.

:rolleyes:
No doubt, but what we need isn't what is. Humanity is asleep and can become psychotically enamored of that dream. One has a right to defend oneself against any who are willing to act out physically against you with deadly thread, with deadly counteraction is there is no other way. But understanding that humanity is asleep means automatically you are not entitled to take preemptive action without real imminent threat. It prevents moral fanaticism. You can't trigger yourself with thought of evil and pointing fingers of moral outrage.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
71,774
5,851
126
You are a slick one. It sounds like you spent a good deal of time in analysis. The scariest thing for you is meeting the people who are above the law. They kill someone in front of you and say it looks like you have a problem. But I didn't do it. We know, we did it and we belei

Don't get this, sorry

What you are doing is known as intellectualizing. That is a defense mechanism. Using logic, reason and philosophy to justify the state of mind or situation a person finds themselves in. [/QUOTE]

Don't get this either but I suppose that above, I was trying to justify a case against judgmentalism. And there is always the problem that no matter the nature of the finger pointing at the moon, the finger is not the moon.

The dilemma I feel here is that I don't know if you just wanted to state your position or wanted a conversation. If the latter I don't really get or understand enough of what you are saying to reply.
 

Pohemi

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2004
7,731
8,746
146
No doubt, but what we need isn't what is. Humanity is asleep and can become psychotically enamored of that dream. One has a right to defend oneself against any who are willing to act out physically against you with deadly thread, with deadly counteraction is there is no other way.
Of course you have a right to defend yourself against physical violence perpetrated by others. That conflicts with what you've stated in other circumstances though. Where I might see someone doing "evil" by attacking someone, killing someone, raping someone, doing harm to others, you want to tell me that I only describe them that way because I see myself in them and use words to divide. I don't see how that makes any sense.
But understanding that humanity is asleep means automatically you are not entitled to take preemptive action without real imminent threat. It prevents moral fanaticism. You can't trigger yourself with thought of evil and pointing fingers of moral outrage.
You may be correct about one thing equating to the other, but I don't believe it's always true in reverse. Some people's ingrained sense of morality prevents them from attacking or killing someone else, maybe even if it means their own life (having a gun for defense but not being able to pull the trigger in the moment they need to, etc.) That doesn't mean that they meet your definition of not being asleep.

Perhaps you can't trigger yourself into violent actions or physical aggressions against others, but why does that mean you don't see them for what their actions really are? (that would hypothetically trigger emotional response) Ethics and morality might be learned/taught, but it doesn't mean they're based on some psychological state of being asleep and that they mean nothing. Calling people evil for doing evil things doesn't mean you're projecting your own evil.