A scholar identifies an alarming trend among US men.

[Moonbeam]

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.

I have said that you react to facts as though you are to blame for something, that my intention is to say it's your fault. If you can't see that is what you do, automatically and without any conscious awareness or intention, continue to defend yourself against your own imaginary sense of guilt, we can't begin to communicate. You always revert to counter-attack. It's what we mean by trying to punch your way out of a paper bag.

 

[ch33zw1z]

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.

ok moonie, however you need to rationalize your emotional attachment to worldly possessions

 

[Moonbeam]

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.

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.

I am not arguing that. I am arguing that everybody believes in the sacredness of their own personal cows and that nobody can prove to anyone else of a different opinion that their cows are superior. Once you see the hopelessness of belief in the sacred cows of others one can then see that your own are actually no different. If you die to this type of fanatical self certainty, suffer the pain of that loss, realize that all made up sacred cows are enforced by fear and guilt you can let go of ego attachment and so called faith.

Now, what remains after that? The only people who know are those who have experienced such a realization and abandonment of ego flattery. What remains is what it is to be human. I believe such a person is different in ways unrealized people can't imagine. Everything that lies behind all the longing for good we experience as moral sacred cow holding people is vastly exceed by a state one can call God Realization. Everything you have ever dreamed of is better than your wildest dreams. My opinion, of course.

 

[Hans Gruber]

Don't get this, sorry

What I was getting at. There is no point or good outcome for the intellectual mind or thinker throughout history. The best historical examples are outcomes during medieval times.

You have to learn how to use the quoting system on these threads.

 

[Moonbeam]

ok moonie, however you need to rationalize your emotional attachment to worldly possessions

I plan to take with me what I came in with. Meanwhile what foods these morsels be.

And as a keen observer of life with a great measure of self reproach and regret thrown in, I have found that I miraculously happen upon some job or task that some piece of junk I just threw away would have been the perfect solution. I still have my electric train from when I was two. I figure I meal would be a good trade for a bullet after the Zombie Apocalypse and that's just around the corner.

 

[Moonbeam]

For some reason I can't quote your last post where you mention the medieval times. Sorry but I have no idea what you are talking about there either. Perhaps you are stating a position that others have taken on the internet and you could refer me to one of those.

Edit: If I screwed up the quoting system it's because I used to do things my way and got a lot of flack so tried to do better but perhaps failed at that too.

 

[dank69]

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.

First we have to assume your statistics actually indicate what you are saying they indicate. I've only skimmed the debate in this thread but from what I've seen, that isn't likely the case.

Regardless, even if we go with the assumption, I do not believe it matters much. The GOP is so bad right now and has been so bad for so long that anyone who isn't voting straight ticket Democrat is unreachable no matter the technique or message. A sane person would vote for weekly government mandated colonoscopies over any GOP politician.

 

[cytg111]

I have said that you react to facts as though you are to blame for something, that my intention is to say it's your fault. If you can't see that is what you do, automatically and without any conscious awareness or intention, continue to defend yourself against your own imaginary sense of guilt, we can't begin to communicate. You always revert to counter-attack. It's what we mean by trying to punch your way out of a paper bag.

... right

“I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.”

And until that day, you fancy yourself a pig, we wont have proper words. I mean I know what you are but you got to figure this shit out on your own.

 

[Maxima1]

Of course it matters. Does everything in the UK happen exactly as it does in the US and vice versa? No.

Secondly, if you want to use the UK, the same thing holds true in the UK as in the US at least in terms of suicide attempts, women attempt it more. They do just avoid the most immediately painful methods as well there, as the US article states. Hanging is one of the most immediately painful methods. As my link states, women attempt it in less 'drastic' ways that seem less painful - like say OD'ing which sounds like a more peaceful way to go from a layperson's POV. Ultimately women are suicidal more and attempt more, they just approach it differently.

I see the problem is due to cutting out your original post; you think I'm arguing to say that men have it harder because they suicide more, but I was pointing out that the bold in the post about other methods being only about 10% or less effective doesn't fit with the stats. From what I've seen the fatality is estimated around 50-70% with hanging.

So if you guys are trying to prove that men have it worse, you are fucked no matter which country you use as an example.

Well, if you want to use it to suggest women have it harder, then I guess black people have the least issues because they report higher self-esteem and don't suicide.

Also that article you linked up used 12 men and 10 women as its entire data point in total. That's pretty pathetic.

I quoted the background information, which is from references.

For what they were trying to accomplish, meh, not really pathetic. The main finding that people thought it would be easy is kind of a no-shit result and choosing hanging because it's not messy is something I've seen elsewhere and not surprising.

For human history, people have shown to require purpose to feel self worth. Automation shouldn't remove the purpose people feel, but it does.

Yeah, no. I think a lot has to do with it being easier to make comparisons with others. See Sunburn's post for instance, where he talks about the top 0.1% of men, which is exactly how many feminists like to discuss gender differences, too.

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.

That was true decades ago.

Latest World & National News & Headlines - USATODAY.com

USA TODAY delivers current national and local news, sports, entertainment, finance, technology, and more through award-winning journalism, photos, and videos.

usatoday30.usatoday.com

Students also spent 50% less time studying compared with students a few decades ago, the research shows.

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.

Like the DEI racket.

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.

Did you know Krugman hates UBI because it's either too little or too much? Yang's amount is both to him even though it's really just effectively unionization premium for all, so apparently private sector compensates just fine. The "too little" critique also doesn't make much sense because excepting disability and short-term and meager TANF, there isn't cash transfers.

 

[Moonbeam]

First we have to assume your statistics actually indicate what you are saying they indicate. I've only skimmed the debate in this thread but from what I've seen, that isn't likely the case.

Regardless, even if we go with the assumption, I do not believe it matters much. The GOP is so bad right now and has been so bad for so long that anyone who isn't voting straight ticket Democrat is unreachable no matter the technique or message. A sane person would vote for weekly government mandated colonoscopies over any GOP politician.

We on the left do believe that the way the masses on the right think gas been trained into them by right wing radio and Fox News TV. I believe that is accurate to a very large degree. But it also implies, I believe, that if they can be trained to believe such outrageous distortions of truth it should be just as possible to persuade people of things far more truthful. One of those ways, in my opinion, is to begin to openly advocate for a non-gender emphasized political stand that includes advocacy for economic uplift across the board. The Democrats are doing it but they are not gender neutral message wise or as much I and others think it would benefit them to be.

 

[Moonbeam]

... right

“I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.”

And until that day, you fancy yourself a pig, we wont have proper words. I mean I know what you are but you got to figure this shit out on your own.

Fine fine but I do not know or pretend to know how animals look at us. I believe that we created God because we have the potential to be how we imagine him to be. It could be that we evolved to be that way because God created us to be like that. To me it doesn't make the slightest difference. We can't know if we only created God or we did so because God created us. But what I do believe is that animals see who we really are, Gods, and that we see ourselves as shit and treat the whole world that way. I have had dogs and cats and I see them as divine beings and I think they see me that way too. When the ego dies all that is left is the source of being and that can become hidden only to people. Saints, as you may know, often have stories regarding animals in their histories.

 

[MrSquished]

I see the problem is due to cutting out your original post; you think I'm arguing to say that men have it harder because they suicide more, but I was pointing out that the bold in the post about other methods being only about 10% or less effective doesn't fit with the stats. From what I've seen the fatality is estimated around 50-70% with hanging.

Well, if you want to use it to suggest women have it harder, then I guess black people have the least issues because they report higher self-esteem and don't suicide.

I quoted the background information, which is from references.

For what they were trying to accomplish, meh, not really pathetic. The main finding that people thought it would be easy is kind of a no-shit result and choosing hanging because it's not messy is something I've seen elsewhere and not surprising.


Yeah, no. I think a lot has to do with it being easier to make comparisons with others. See Sunburn's post for instance, where he talks about the top 0.1% of men, which is exactly how many feminists like to discuss gender differences, too.


That was true decades ago.

Latest World & National News & Headlines - USATODAY.com

USA TODAY delivers current national and local news, sports, entertainment, finance, technology, and more through award-winning journalism, photos, and videos.

usatoday30.usatoday.com

Students also spent 50% less time studying compared with students a few decades ago, the research shows.

Like the DEI racket.

Did you know Krugman hates UBI because it's either too little or too much? Yang's amount is both to him even though it's really just effectively unionization premium for all, so apparently private sector compensates just fine. The "too little" critique also doesn't make much sense because excepting disability and short-term and meager TANF, there isn't cash transfers.

You are ignoring a crucial point. There aren't only two suicide options, guns and hanging. And as I already showed, women usually choose the less immediately painful far more than men, that includes hanging, and as far as guns they are not nearly as avid as men when it comes to owning guns. So no, you can't just consider hanging and suicide by gun because that is dishonest. Hanging is not messy? Is that what you are saying here to be clear?

I never tried to use suicide stats to say this group has it harder or easier than any other. You are putting words in my mouth. That's on you making shit up in your head.

I'm just pointing out your stats are bullshit for all the reasons in this post and the posts I made earlier.

But like I said, you are one of the persistently intellectually dishonest people here so I'm just posting this so anybody not aware of the actual facts has them.

The student studying thing is irrelevant to this entire thread.

 

[J30_Uwe]

I think the reason is pretty clear.

 

[MrSquished]

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.

I have always stated I think the Democrats are not as good at messaging as they should be. It's not all their fault of course as a lot of people are beyond help. You don't realize this because you don't even think bad behavior is anything but a perception by someone else. Democrats do message about healthcare and unions and higher pay. Meanwhile low-paid workers that need healthcare hate them and lots of union workers hate Democrats and on and on. Why? The message is clear from Dems on these issues so what is the issue here? The issue is humans. They prefer hate of the other over a benefit to themselves that is clearly ethical such as supporting the existence of unions or the ability to not have to go bankrupt for a medical emergency. They choose hate. A lot also choose the POV that why should anything be better for future generations because I had it this way and nothing convinces them otherwise for anything. Pure and utter selfishness.

To prefer hate of others when a party is clearly telling you when they are messaging well on some of these issues is a defect of the humans themselves. As we see here many conservatives get all the facts lined up in many responses to them, with links and everything - and most refuse to acknowledge any of them and evade simple yes or no questions all the time. They are choosing ignorance and hate over everything else, including the best messaging possible. For example, fskimopy has very coherent and factual posts with very logical arguments the vast majority of the time. He gets nowhere most of the time. Why? The posters are choosing hate and ignorance purposely and over and over again.

This is why history is littered with horrific acts perpetrated and gone along with by huge swaths of people. Because people don't recognize evil. I once had a girlfriend who refused to acknowledge Hitler was evil. It was too strong of a word for her. I suspect it is for you too. After all, concentration camps are just a perception of bad behavior.

The rest of your post besides the messaging part is gibberish. And with the messaging thing I have always stated the Dems lack some messaging skills. A lot of it is overestimating people, as you do constantly. Hilary was like amazed to finally admit, there is actually a basket of deplorables. But it was too little too late. And Obama was oblivious to this too in many ways. Democrats believe too much that people can't possibly want to choose hate over good governance but they do it all the fucking time. Sure some are ignorant and that's true. But many really feed off the hate. Many people enjoy and feed off the hate no matter what. I don't see that as a perception issue. It's a fundamental human trait.

And at the end of the day, when fascists are marching down your street it's not going to matter if some are just ignorant, cause you will be fucked. It's over. You are now potentially part of a resistance force and that's it. So it's time to recognize the enemy otherwise we are going right down the same path as many countries have done in modern history, and you are too oblivious to see it. You could be turned in to whatever iteration is next of the Gestapo, by your neighbors, for being too liberal, and you'd be apologizing to them for perceiving your behavior is bad, and apologizing to the Gestapo for being misunderstood. Bigly sad.

Do I have some selfishness and hate in me and some self-hate? Sure I do. But I don't vote in racist, bigoted hateful fascist people into power and support racist, bigoted and hateful fascist ideals and I don't try to oppress people for racist, bigoted and misogynistic reasons either. So I have that going for me.

 

[dank69]

We on the left do believe that the way the masses on the right think gas been trained into them by right wing radio and Fox News TV. I believe that is accurate to a very large degree. But it also implies, I believe, that if they can be trained to believe such outrageous distortions of truth it should be just as possible to persuade people of things far more truthful. One of those ways, in my opinion, is to begin to openly advocate for a non-gender emphasized political stand that includes advocacy for economic uplift across the board. The Democrats are doing it but they are not gender neutral message wise or as much I and others think it would benefit them to be.

I bet most Democratic messaging is already gender neutral.

 

[MrSquished]

I bet most Democratic messaging is already gender neutral.

Clearly when they advocate for healthcare for all they just mean women, minorities and gays. Dittos with supporting unions, a higher minimum wage, affordable housing, investment in infrastructure, education, the environment. They just want roads for women, education for women, housing for women, unions for women, higher minimum wage for women only, etc...

Moonbeam has gone full GQP on this topic for sure.

 

[Moonbeam]

I bet most Democratic messaging is already gender neutral.

I bet most Democratic messaging is already gender neutral.

When I ran into the OP link on CNN I thought the author was making some sense so I checked out his book for further info. It says this in a blurb on Amazon:

"A positive vision for masculinity in a more equal world


Boys and men are struggling. Profound economic and social changes of recent decades have many losing ground in the classroom, the workplace, and in the family. While the lives of women have changed, the lives of many men have remained the same or even worsened.


Our attitudes, our institutions, and our laws have failed to keep up. Conservative and progressive politicians, mired in their own ideological warfare, fail to provide thoughtful solutions.


The father of three sons, a journalist, and a Brookings Institution scholar, Richard V. Reeves has spent twenty-five years worrying about boys both at home and work. His new book, Of Boys and Men, tackles the complex and urgent crisis of boyhood and manhood.


Reeves looks at the structural challenges that face boys and men and offers fresh and innovative solutions that turn the page on the corrosive narrative that plagues this issue. Of Boys and Men argues that helping the other half of society does not mean giving up on the ideal of gender equality."

The author also deals with what he feels is a missed opportunity politically to help, the idea that Democrats are not emphasizing the difficulties he describes facing men because he feels that Democrats are afraid it might cost them women's' votes.

I thought he had a point and that it would be good if men's issues could be more openly addressed by the Democratic party because whatever issues men are facing improving their lot would also help women and perhaps even more.

You are betting that these ideas aren't actually there in Democratic politics. How about they are there in Republican politics in the form of turning men against anything that benefits women like welfare, medical help, free education, oh you name it, a democratic vote etc. Lets make sure, however, we just put such men in the deplorable box and hope they rot in hell. Wouldn't be a good idea maybe, like telling them they are getting fucked and getting fucked by male Republican politicians.

Fine. Gender never enters a liberal's head.

 

[Moonbeam]

I have always stated I think the Democrats are not as good at messaging as they should be. It's not all their fault of course as a lot of people are beyond help. You don't realize this because you don't even think bad behavior is anything but a perception by someone else.

No, I do not agree that people are beyond help. I have said they are not able to help themselves because they have been filled with the notion they are worthless by being put down as children and now will not open themselves to the pain conscious awareness of that fact would bring. People in a state of denial are beyond help.

Democrats do message about healthcare and unions and higher pay. Meanwhile low-paid workers that need healthcare hate them and lots of union workers hate Democrats and on and on. Why? The message is clear from Dems on these issues so what is the issue here? The issue is humans. They prefer hate of the other over a benefit to themselves that is clearly ethical such as supporting the existence of unions or the ability to not have to go bankrupt for a medical emergency. They choose hate. A lot also choose the POV that why should anything be better for future generations because I had it this way and nothing convinces them otherwise for anything. Pure and utter selfishness.

Democrats do message as you say. They need to message that the things you next described are attitudes generated by self hate. Democrats need to target Republicans as manipulators of fear in the service of corporate America. I think they need to attack more aggressively and cut back on identity politics.

To prefer hate of others when a party is clearly telling you when they are messaging well on some of these issues is a defect of the humans themselves. As we see here many conservatives get all the facts lined up in many responses to them, with links and everything - and most refuse to acknowledge any of them and evade simple yes or no questions all the time. They are choosing ignorance and hate over everything else, including the best messaging possible. For example, fskimopy has very coherent and factual posts with very logical arguments the vast majority of the time. He gets nowhere most of the time. Why? The posters are choosing hate and ignorance purposely and over and over again.

My explanation is that they can't help rationalizing away anything that negatively impacts on their egos. They create alternate realities and herd up in them. This self destructive behavior is again the result of not recognizing that they believe one kind of behavior their behavior to be the one and only good, and everybody not like them to be evil. That kind of good and evil is delusional.

This is why history is littered with horrific acts perpetrated and gone along with by huge swaths of people. Because people don't recognize evil. I once had a girlfriend who refused to acknowledge Hitler was evil. It was too strong of a word for her. I suspect it is for you too. After all, concentration camps are just a perception of bad behavior.

Not hardly. I know exactly what you mean by evil. But evil can only exist where a person is in denial about feeling evil him or her self. We were controlled as children by a promise of love and a threat of its revocation is we did not believe that what we were told is right and wrong was ever questioned. The only way to survive once that threat is made clear is to surrender psychically. We then become enforcers or we rebels.

The rest of your post besides the messaging part is gibberish. And with the messaging thing I have always stated the Dems lack some messaging skills. A lot of it is overestimating people, as you do constantly. Hilary was like amazed to finally admit, there is actually a basket of deplorables. But it was too little too late. And Obama was oblivious to this too in many ways. Democrats believe too much that people can't possibly want to choose hate over good governance but they do it all the fucking time. Sure some are ignorant and that's true. But many really feed off the hate. Many people enjoy and feed off the hate no matter what. I don't see that as a perception issue. It's a fundamental human trait.

It is a trait of people who hate themselves. People who hate themselves are people who believe in evil, repress it and have it leak out in their behavior. They are not evil really but only because they are prisoners of that lie. You can't see a perception that isn't perceived. Doesn't mean it isn't there.

And at the end of the day, when fascists are marching down your street it's not going to matter if some are just ignorant, cause you will be fucked. It's over. You are now potentially part of a resistance force and that's it. So it's time to recognize the enemy otherwise we are going right down the same path as many countries have done in modern history, and you are too oblivious to see it. You could be turned in to whatever iteration is next of the Gestapo, by your neighbors, for being too liberal, and you'd be apologizing to them for perceiving your behavior is bad, and apologizing to the Gestapo for being misunderstood. Bigly sad.

The problem with your description is that self hate is universal and humanity's only hope that I can see is to recognize that fact. Lacking that our self hate creates exactly what we fear.

Do I have some selfishness and hate in me and some self-hate? Sure I do. But I don't vote in racist, bigoted hateful fascist people into power and support racist, bigoted and hateful fascist ideals and I don't try to oppress people for racist, bigoted and misogynistic reasons either. So I have that going for me.

You and me both. But I am going to try also to recognize as best I can that my hatred of Nazis was learned by me by being condemned as even worse. I can recognize the danger they pose without losing my shit and projecting my self hate on them. They wouldn't be as they are if their self contempt was perhaps even worse than mine or that they take themselves more seriously.

 

[Pohemi]

One of those ways, in my opinion, is to begin to openly advocate for a non-gender emphasized political stand that includes advocacy for economic uplift across the board. The Democrats are doing it but they are not gender neutral message wise or as much I and others think it would benefit them to be.

Fine. Gender never enters a liberal's head.

Men are not the gender that get paid less, that get passed over for advancement and opportunities in the workplace more often. Those are only issues in the workplace.

I think the biggest gender-specific issue is abortion and women's right to control of their own bodies. Republicans aren't trying to control men's testicles.

These are the reasons that women get focus where men don't. I believe this focus is needed, because it's calling for equality where there isn't any. Democrats aren't arguing for women to get one over on men, be paid higher than men, etc. They're arguing for equality. Their messaging could be stronger on many topics, sure. But how can they 'pander' to men to make them feel more included? If men are "struggling in modern society", and it's a widespread issue, I think it could be mental health related more than anything.

 

[Moonbeam]

Men are not the gender that get paid less, that get passed over for advancement and opportunities in the workplace more often. Those are only issues in the workplace.

I think the biggest gender-specific issue is abortion and women's right to control of their own bodies. Republicans aren't trying to control men's testicles.

These are the reasons that women get focus where men don't. I believe this focus is needed, because it's calling for equality where there isn't any. Democrats aren't arguing for women to get one over on men, be paid higher than men, etc. They're arguing for equality. Their messaging could be stronger on many topics, sure. But how can they 'pander' to men to make them feel more included? If men are "struggling in modern society", and it's a widespread issue, I think it could be mental health related more than anything.

I see at the heart of every issue that creates misery for people the inability of people to deal with them because we unconsciously avoid understanding the cause is not out there in the world but inside of us generally. We do not know what we feel, do not want to know and do not know we don't want to know. Thus, everything is a mental health issue in my opinion. We blame the world for our misery because we do not want to become aware of our inner pain and avoid it by projecting.

Many Republicans do not favor an abortion ban including Republican men. Democrats could maybe figure out why and sell those reasons- in campaigns etc.

 

[dank69]

When I ran into the OP link on CNN I thought the author was making some sense so I checked out his book for further info. It says this in a blurb on Amazon:

"A positive vision for masculinity in a more equal world


Boys and men are struggling. Profound economic and social changes of recent decades have many losing ground in the classroom, the workplace, and in the family. While the lives of women have changed, the lives of many men have remained the same or even worsened.

When you lose your power over everyone else it can feel like oppression. The important thing is to remind people that think that way that they are narcissistic fucks and until they care more about everyone else than themselves, nobody is going to give a shit about them.

Our attitudes, our institutions, and our laws have failed to keep up. Conservative and progressive politicians, mired in their own ideological warfare, fail to provide thoughtful solutions.


The father of three sons, a journalist, and a Brookings Institution scholar, Richard V. Reeves has spent twenty-five years worrying about boys both at home and work. His new book, Of Boys and Men, tackles the complex and urgent crisis of boyhood and manhood.


Reeves looks at the structural challenges that face boys and men and offers fresh and innovative solutions that turn the page on the corrosive narrative that plagues this issue. Of Boys and Men argues that helping the other half of society does not mean giving up on the ideal of gender equality."

The author also deals with what he feels is a missed opportunity politically to help, the idea that Democrats are not emphasizing the difficulties he describes facing men because he feels that Democrats are afraid it might cost them women's' votes.

I thought he had a point and that it would be good if men's issues could be more openly addressed by the Democratic party because whatever issues men are facing improving their lot would also help women and perhaps even more.

He does have a point, although not exactly the way he thinks he does. There are legitimate issues facing men that society has ignored for way too long. Some of these issues are men being discouraged from expressing their feelings in healthy ways, men being discouraged from acting any way that makes them happy because it might be "gay," and the idea that men need to be self-sufficient. None of these should be political, but the GOP being what it is are more than happy to seize on the symptoms they cause and feed the afflicted men simple (simple means it's effective) but malicious slogans like "men aren't allowed to be men anymore."

Think for a second about how much harm a slogan like that does. For starters, it resonates with millions who are in pain but don't know why. It means many different things to many different people. For millions it means they can't bully people to make themselves feel better. For others, it means they can't beat their spouses in public anymore like God intended. For others it means they can't get sex the only plausible way possible for them (in their minds) by raping whoever they want whenever they want.

Because in reality, these are the types of things men actually aren't allowed to do anymore. So when Republicans use that slogan they are tacitly saying men should be allowed to bully, abuse and rape, just so they can get votes. And what pray tell is the fucking counter to that? Give us your simple slogan that won't be dismissed as gay or woke or buying votes or whatever. You can't do it because you missed my earlier point anyway: people who are not voting straight Democrat already are damaged to the point that politics does not matter.

You are betting that these ideas aren't actually there in Democratic politics. How about they are there in Republican politics in the form of turning men against anything that benefits women like welfare, medical help, free education, oh you name it, a democratic vote etc. Lets make sure, however, we just put such men in the deplorable box and hope they rot in hell. Wouldn't be a good idea maybe, like telling them they are getting fucked and getting fucked by male Republican politicians.

Fine. Gender never enters a liberal's head.

Temper tantrum is not a good look for you.

 

[cytg111]

I see at the heart of every issue that creates misery for people the inability of people to deal with them because we unconsciously avoid understanding the cause is not out there in the world but inside of us generally. We do not know what we feel, do not want to know and do not know we don't want to know. Thus, everything is a mental health issue in my opinion. We blame the world for our misery because we do not want to become aware of our inner pain and avoid it by projecting.

Many Republicans do not favor an abortion ban including Republican men. Democrats could maybe figure out why and sell those reasons- in campaigns etc.

Thats fucking brilliant, why noone thought of that?

Fine fine but I do not know or pretend to know how animals look at us. I believe that we created God because we have the potential to be how we imagine him to be. It could be that we evolved to be that way because God created us to be like that. To me it doesn't make the slightest difference. We can't know if we only created God or we did so because God created us. But what I do believe is that animals see who we really are, Gods, and that we see ourselves as shit and treat the whole world that way. I have had dogs and cats and I see them as divine beings and I think they see me that way too. When the ego dies all that is left is the source of being and that can become hidden only to people. Saints, as you may know, often have stories regarding animals in their histories.

Why should anyone take advice from you that you refuse to follow yourself. Meh. False prophets, so many these days.

 

[SMOGZINN]

When you lose your power over everyone else it can feel like oppression. The important thing is to remind people that think that way that they are narcissistic fucks and until they care more about everyone else than themselves, nobody is going to give a shit about them.

One of the big problems is that some people define their self-worth based on how much better they are than some out group. That means that as that out group achieves some measure of equality it reduces the self-worth of those that use their repression as a measuring stick.

Edit: To be clear I'm saying some men are feeling oppressed because they use the repression of women as a measuring stick for how good they have it. Their absolute value or place in society has not changed, but they feel like it has because of how they measure it.

 

[MrSquished]

No, I do not agree that people are beyond help. I have said they are not able to help themselves because they have been filled with the notion they are worthless by being put down as children and now will not open themselves to the pain conscious awareness of that fact would bring. People in a state of denial are beyond help.



Democrats do message as you say. They need to message that the things you next described are attitudes generated by self hate. Democrats need to target Republicans as manipulators of fear in the service of corporate America. I think they need to attack more aggressively and cut back on identity politics.



My explanation is that they can't help rationalizing away anything that negatively impacts on their egos. They create alternate realities and herd up in them. This self destructive behavior is again the result of not recognizing that they believe one kind of behavior their behavior to be the one and only good, and everybody not like them to be evil. That kind of good and evil is delusional.



Not hardly. I know exactly what you mean by evil. But evil can only exist where a person is in denial about feeling evil him or her self. We were controlled as children by a promise of love and a threat of its revocation is we did not believe that what we were told is right and wrong was ever questioned. The only way to survive once that threat is made clear is to surrender psychically. We then become enforcers or we rebels.



It is a trait of people who hate themselves. People who hate themselves are people who believe in evil, repress it and have it leak out in their behavior. They are not evil really but only because they are prisoners of that lie. You can't see a perception that isn't perceived. Doesn't mean it isn't there.



The problem with your description is that self hate is universal and humanity's only hope that I can see is to recognize that fact. Lacking that our self hate creates exactly what we fear.


You and me both. But I am going to try also to recognize as best I can that my hatred of Nazis was learned by me by being condemned as even worse. I can recognize the danger they pose without losing my shit and projecting my self hate on them. They wouldn't be as they are if their self contempt was perhaps even worse than mine or that they take themselves more seriously.

So let's say there are no inherently evil qualities in humans, even though millenia of history show us this is completely not the case. But let's work with your theory. It's all about levels of self-hate.

What does it matter where the evil comes from then if they are going to completely oppress peoples and governments? At what point does self-hate that leads to horrific actions, thoughts, ideals and support of evil actions actually become evil? Was Hitler just a misunderstood painter to you? You could be being tortured by the future GQP gestapo and trying to talk to them about sufis and their internal pain while they get ready for that final lethal shock of electricity to kill you after having murdered your family, all while laughing at you. And you'd still be oblivious.

I don't care where it comes from, it's evil.

 

[Moonbeam]

When you lose your power over everyone else it can feel like oppression. The important thing is to remind people that think that way that they are narcissistic fucks and until they care more about everyone else than themselves, nobody is going to give a shit about them.


He does have a point, although not exactly the way he thinks he does. There are legitimate issues facing men that society has ignored for way too long. Some of these issues are men being discouraged from expressing their feelings in healthy ways, men being discouraged from acting any way that makes them happy because it might be "gay," and the idea that men need to be self-sufficient. None of these should be political, but the GOP being what it is are more than happy to seize on the symptoms they cause and feed the afflicted men simple (simple means it's effective) but malicious slogans like "men aren't allowed to be men anymore."

Think for a second about how much harm a slogan like that does. For starters, it resonates with millions who are in pain but don't know why. It means many different things to many different people. For millions it means they can't bully people to make themselves feel better. For others, it means they can't beat their spouses in public anymore like God intended. For others it means they can't get sex the only plausible way possible for them (in their minds) by raping whoever they want whenever they want.

Because in reality, these are the types of things men actually aren't allowed to do anymore. So when Republicans use that slogan they are tacitly saying men should be allowed to bully, abuse and rape, just so they can get votes. And what pray tell is the fucking counter to that? Give us your simple slogan that won't be dismissed as gay or woke or buying votes or whatever. You can't do it because you missed my earlier point anyway: people who are not voting straight Democrat already are damaged to the point that politics does not matter.

Temper tantrum is not a good look for you.

I suppose you think the inane state of your negative hopelessness is. But then why would any self hater have any reason for hope. Are you aware that your world view is deeply sad? Perhaps it is you who is having the temper tantrum. Perhaps you are secretly hanging on, refusing to accept your own realization. A tiger above and a tiger below and you still hanging on, furious over your fate.