That’s literally all there is to it. Even in the olden days it was a well known fact that a generation of young men without (economic, social, romantic) perspective is a generation who will radicalize to either side. If the system isn’t working for them they will seek to change the system.
If politicians were serious about curbing extremism they would make sure everyone simply lives a decent standard of living, with prospects for their future.
Its also why I believe most modern governments try REALLY hard not to go to war. Not because of the death and destruction but because they dont want a combat trained populace.
Also because shared adversity unites, the differences between people get really unimportant when they are trying to keep each other alive in combat.
The idea of a significant percentage of “us” coming back and being united and trained well enough to actually threaten the system scares the piss out of them.
I think your more or less correct, but I wanted to point out that there is also a lack of support for these men.
I’m currently at university and so far as I have been able to find there is exactly zero support, or desire for white, cis men. There are advertised support groups, grants and bursaries, and programs for literally every other demographic on campus. If your a white man however your on your own, often because “oh, your part of the patriarchy and don’t need help”.
It makes it tough to change for the better when its seems that all the groups that seek to improve conditions for the repressed usually point at white men and say “Your bad and should feel bad because your a man”. I either stand alone or with the fascists, so I stand alone and do my best to be supportive of human rights for all from the outside.
That is true, more support is needed all around, and there is a crisis of men questioning themselves and their society, along with well-funded outside forces ready to radicalize them.
The central question is compelling because self development and changing society are both vitally important, and we need to be doing a LOT better than yelling “No, not like that!”
It also must be noted that the left in the US has been vilifying men for many years now. It’s starting to change, but that made it easy for extremists to swoop in and radicalize men.
One: because fascist would ensure their place at the top of the social/political/financial pyramid.
Two: because the world’s economic system lied to them. Being a morally good, hard working human guaranteed a comfortable life. In fact being morally good and/or hard working may actually be a hindrance to living a comfortable life.
Three: poor education and exploitation. Ever book that is banned or text book that says, “slavery was understandable in fact slavers are benevolent leaders saving the ‘others’ from themselves.” and you know, being used by those that actually hold power. Donald Trump would pretend to be the next Joseph Stalin if it ment he would be protected by those willing to do violence in his name. Just the fact that governments have" heads of state" means those that want to be president, king, prime minister probably should be allowed to be leaders.
Not sure point One is fully correct. I think they often realize things is going to be shitty for everyone, but they think it will be less shitty for them if it gets more shitty for others. They know they will be an exploited working class (even if it is not phrased that way for them) as long as there is a part of the working class (immigrant workers, women workers, …) that is beneath them it makes them feel more ‘on top’.
Ya but making everyone else’s life more shitty ensures they are still “on top” in their eyes. It’s the same reason most confederate men fought in the civil war even though they didn’t own slaves. Ya their life sucked but at least they weren’t slaves. The moment more human beings get emancipated, be that from slavery, wage slavery, women suffrage, segregation, etc that means they have more competition in the flawed economic, social, and political systems designed around capitalism.
Social justice influencers acridly piling blame for social problems onto cis white males without nuance. This makes a lot of cis white males feel targeted for factors outside their control, and so they flock to ideologies that venerate them.
General dissatisfaction with career and other life prospects, in the shadow of an idyllic bygone status-quo propped up by exploitative short term policies. They saw their parents and grandparents thrive in that trad-coded utopia, and they’re noticing the inadequacies of their own prospects.
So mostly those two things, exacerbated by fascist propagandists who have taken advantage of them to promote the facade of a return-to-roots. Also good old fashioned cult of personality.
To your first point, the nature of communicating right now, particularly on the internet, means there is no room to have two different voices:
You can’t have an “inside voice” (communicating to those who already agree with you and reinforcing micro-cultural support) and an “outside voice” (communicating with everyone else, potentially finding or convincing new supporters); every statement is heard by everyone and is, de facto, outside voice.
And that’s only for people who would otherwise care to differentiate— the overall culture views conflict as a virtue, and so rewards people who “tell it like it is,” ignoring the fact that you can tell it like it is in ways that don’t maximize belligerence and alienation.
They aren’t left. They are paid assets or bots by the global fascist movement. I absolutely refuse to consider them left because their actions benefit the right. Who cares what they say, what do their actions do?
I agree with this bit, they aren’t left and their actions benefit the right. I came upon the histories of rich white men exploiting labor forces and toxic business practices to squeeze the lower classes when I was a teenager and discovered those same kind of histories had been evolved or evolve in some circles to outright hate for white people succeeding in life as if it was their white privilege and blood money inherited wealth that carried them that far. The truth I think is yea white privilege exists but also many of those people earned their place in society by working with the opportunities life made available, trying hard in school or getting into trade work and sticking with it. Of course their are many people benefiting from inherited wealth and status of their family and I imagine many of our oligarchs in America are white. Still now is not the time for these so called leftists to start outright hating every white cisgendered man or woman they meet. It only serves the enemies of progress to do that. It wrongfully ostracizes masses of white men and the only place they have to turn is to people like Ben Shapiro or other similar talking heads telling them, “look at how the left treats us and how much they want to destroy our way of life.” The left by its principles or ideals is a place of acceptance and equality. Anyone not practicing that towards all walks of life, excluding any violent extremists, is not supporting the left and should not call themselves a leftist.
You’re missing nuance. They don’t code white PEOPLE as bad, they code whiteNESS as bad. Whiteness is a social construct, it’s not an innate characteristic. If you’re white, it’s because some people 500 years ago decided you were white. It’s a choice that was made. It’s not part of you, it’s just a name for how society treats you.
So when I say “whites are evil”, I’m not calling you specifically evil. I’m saying that society tells you to be evil. To reject evil is to reject whiteness and society, and that’s what you should do.
Because they are immersed in an ecosystem that pretends that respect for human dignity and unearned respect for authority are identical because they use the same word.
They believe that others should respect the innate authority they feel they should hold as men. Simultaneously, since they don't get that, they don't feel like they need to respect other people's right to exist.
And then a group promises them everything they've ever wanted, if they are willing to do fascist shit. Of course they're into it.
I highly doubt any language is more correlated with authoritarianism, particularly the English language. There is a cultural aspect to collective action over individualism, but I think authoritarianism is a base human personality trait.
You might change your view about that if you ever read “Mutual Aid” by Peter Kropotkin. I used to think the same, but it appears things like authoritarianism and hierarchies actually run contrary to evolution. Not that the trait doesn’t exist, but it appears to be something that has been exacerbated in cultures that deliberately adopt a hierarchical system vs. something that’s just natural to all humans.
I am someone who believes that multilevel selection is a primary driver of evolutionary dynamics and works at levels ranging from the organism to the ecosystem (at various levels of effectiveness). Kropotkin is nice philosophically, although he is read about far more often than he is read. That’s entirely reasonable, because his theories provide a foundation for lines of investigation we still pursue today but are obviously outdated, as are the ideas of everyone whose work predated discoveries like genes.
If you want a more modern view on the evolutionary benefits of cooperation, I would suggest starting with Harvard biology professor EO Wilson, who specialized in ants and ended up concluding that humans were in fact a eusocial species - unique among primates and one of very few on earth. He invented the field (or at least added additional formalization to the study) of sociobiology - the evolution of social behaviors. It’s the same category as ants and bees. For an anthropological and cross-cultural perspective I’d suggest Graeber. For a mathematical and economic perspective, I’d start with Sam Bowles. For the foundations of pro-social behavior in primates, I’d recommend Frans de Waal.
I’d be happy to try to answer any questions on the subject.
I’m not qualified to engage in your discussion, nor do I have a good experience trusting random internet strangers who say they’re certain things, but here’s Kropotkin’s book for anyone who wants to read it: theanarchistlibrary.org/…/petr-kropotkin-mutual-a…
Its real simple. It gives them identity and something to go after in a society that offers them nothing. So they get into woodworking, hunting, fighting, only eat meat for a while or some shit.
Males are expendable, the way that all people in capitalism are expendable. But to quote Babe from animal farm: Some are more expendable than others. Males have lower impulse control and have a biological more likely to engage in high risk/ high reward. Most white males are facing the same dilemmas and contradictions around the shittiness and meaninglessness of their existence as everyone else; every one else just doesn’t have a direct pipeline to radicalism engineered for them. For years YT has been trying to steer me down the white nationalist rabbit hole, in-spite of how unappologetically leftist the programing I consume is. I’m a bit older and I’ve been around and politically aware since I was a teen and made the impulsive decision to enlist, then months later we were invading Afghanistan and then Iraq.
This same issue plagues young men from all nationalities and walks of life, not just young white men in the US. We have to collectively find a way to give meaning to peoples lives or that innate search for meaning will be taken advantage of.
Because they are the one group that doesn’t need to think “If I start singling out this group of people for any reason, then others will use that same approach with me”. Ironically, the reason for the vigour of their fascism is the blindly stupid argument that young white men will soon be exctinct.
Somehow gen z’s early exposure to porn has made them more prudish than the religious. Literally. I’ve Seen so many posts on Reddit and had real life conversations with gen z people where they’ve said that they hate when couples publicly say their trying for a baby because it means they’re being “creampied” and that’s awkward for them.
It’s weird for two reasons. One, if you struggle to get pregnant it puts a lot of external pressure on you and you’ll have to go back and let people know you’re potentially infertile. Two, talking about biological things isn’t appropriate in some settings. I don’t want to hear about your colonoscopy. I don’t want to hear that you’re raw dogging your wife. I don’t want to hear about you surgery. Sir, this is a Wendy’s.
That sounds lonely. We all live together. Sharing is a much better default than walling everyone off and judging everyone for sharing really basic parts of life is kind of sad. Obviously there are limit, but “we’re trying to have a baby” and “I’m having surgery” shouldn’t be something that we’re pressured to not share.
I find it more weird that your coworkes talking about trying to get a child results in you imagening them “raw dogging”.
When one of my coworkers had a child born i also didn’t make a point of imagening the delivery process. I just congratulated them and asked them jokingly how much sleep they caught the last night.
Reminds me of some post I read on Reddit regarding a Rimworld sex mod. So many people thought it was completely immoral and had no place in the game.
A game in which you can kidnap and cannibalis children, make clothes of their skin and sell it, a game where you can strap people to a bed, steal all of their organs, cut of their lega so they cant escape and keep them as a blood transfusion slave for ever. Missionary sex between a married couple in their own bed room is wrong and immoral.
That was definitely one of the weirdest takes I have read in a while, still is.
This i can understand though. It is not that the sex itself would be immoral. It is that putting the sex into the context of this violence is immoral.
And i have to say i find this important. Sex to me is an expression of affection with my partner and “sacred” for that. I don’t want it tainted with the banality of pornography or the psychotic issues that make people connect sex and violence.
As much as I like the Marvel movies, or rather did, the problem is that they were never a series of movies, and it could be argued that they should not be taken seriously as pieces of Cinema at least as far as movies are concerned. Because they are not movies, it’s more of a continuous show where all the episodes are very long and very expensive. None of them can truly be considered a self-contained experience. Which is a problem the comic book industry faces all the time as they need to continuously find ways to keep things recognizable yet continuously moving in new directions, there isn’t a chance to actually sit down and tell and develop a single story like there is for manga
That’s oddly about the time I started to become disenchanted with most contemporary cinema. Both parents worked in the Industry, dad was a voting member of the Academy for many years. The Oscars were–no exaggeration–the Holiest night on our family calendar. I even got to attend in person once. (The one where Benigni climbed up on the furniture–'99.)
Then THE ARTIST won best picture (2011). 🤦♂️
I stopped watching the Oscars completely about 5 years ago. The only enthusiasm I can muster anymore is new films by old masters (PTA, Scorsese, Tarantino, etc.)
Copyright is NOT use it or lose it. Franchising licensing contracts might occasionally have such terms but that’s not the primary reason, these companies just don’t like risk
Millennial here. I’ve always found random sex scenes obnoxious. It completely kills the pacing and pulls me out of the story. If you need sex for character development, you can much more easily allude to it and move on. The only time I can think of when it actually made sense for the story was in the movie Her and it was such a mild scene that didn’t have any visuals.
She gave consent in the book, although she was still only like 14 because George RR Martin is a creeper. So not really consent, but not quite like the show.
Why are young people so offended by nudity? Get over yourselves and stop pushing to censor creativity. This is the generation that thinks Marvel represents high class cinema so I suppose I shouldn’t take it too seriously.
For years everyone questioned why literally everything is so overly sexualized. Every plot, every ad, every spare moment when sex is shoehorned into literally everything we see, watch and hear in media. Now, the young adults are sayin, “nah, fuck that” and I dont disagree with that response. I think it’s less them being offended as you’re making it out to be and more just wanting something different besides the status quo. Its unwise and unhelpful to shit on these kids at every turn. Previous generations said the same thing about your generation when you were that age.
It’s a natural part of life but so is pooping and I don’t want to watch anybody do that on screen either. Fade to black. Same with extreme violence. These things can be an important part of the story without being shown graphically.
Pooping doesn’t quite elicit the same emotions between characters as sex now does it? The fact that you’ve even compared the two is wild. Even then I have seen some fantastic pooping scenes in films (Trainspotting).
How about letting directors treat film goers as adults?
Of course people are offended by it. Have you seen this thread? It’s people who find the very idea of sex to be disgusting rather than a beautiful part of life.
They aren’t though. People complain about the nudity in Oppenheimer as being gratuitous but it was a creative way to show how uncomfortable and vulnerable Robert was in that interrogation.
I literally can’t think of another example of a sex scene in recent films because cinema is already becoming more childish and sanitised.
Iam not gen z and not offended by nudity, but mostly i find it doesn’t add to the story if the sex scenes are played out. If i want porn, i just watch porn.
“Show don’t tell” is the golden rule of film making. It’s way better to show relationships between people than allude to them. Of course sex scenes add to stories, sex is a normal and life changing part of people’s lives and that should be reflected in our arts and culture.
Two characters having intimate relations nearly always adds to the story. Very often it’s a major plot point. I don’t know what you’re watching where two characters going at it doesn’t advance the plot in any way.
I just despise the way that people want to stifle creativity and place limits on what is and isn’t acceptable in media based on their own personal squeamishness and morals.
You might think ten minutes are too long. If you do it’s your right to turn it off and not watch without going on a moral rant about how it’s unnecessary.
Okay, but what exactly does it add once you've made your point that they're banging? What additional point are you making that warrants not cutting to the next scene after that point has been established?
Lots of film and show makers don't ask these questions when they make their sex scenes so the result is boring filler.
There is no point talking to you because you don’t realise different people find different values in different things. Some people would rather their TV reflected the reality of human relationships rather than being a sanitised mockery.
Thinking TV sex is anywhere close to pornographic in it’s current iteration is laughable
There is no point talking to you because you don’t realise different people find different values in different things.
Sorry, I put this through my translator but all I got out was 'i don't actually have a point to make so I'm just going to pretend I won the argument'. Is this correct?
Some people would rather their TV reflected the reality of human relationships rather than being a sanitised mockery
It's cute that you think the kinds of shows that have sex scenes are anything other than a mockery of human relationships in themselves. Do you not actually pay attention to the plots?
The first I can’t comment on. Sounds daft, but also sounds like some plot development occurs.
Game of Thrones was literally better and truer to the source material with nudity. The sex scenes 100% added to the tone of the show and showcased many important arcs.
I work in the film business and have been on seta making the biggest movies in the world, even some of those Marvel super hero movies you mentioned. And Although I dont disagree at all those movies are really the lowest common denominator, film making for mainstream consumption is FAR less artistically expressive and driven than what most may realize. Indie films are generally far more creative during the writing and filming process and generally dive deeper into stories that absolutely merit sexual content. I dont think that’s what they are saying though. This is about mainstream media and just wanting something more creative than the same old shit time and time again in relation to sexual content. And I think that’s a fair perspective. There’s true art in film and then there’s the shit on TV and those two are nearly completely seperate.
A Boomer here, and I’m finding these comments to be very interesting–mostly because I’m realizing I agree in many cases! Far from prudish, just last night I fast-forwarded past the sex scenes in the first episode of a new streamer series. “Yeah, yeah, I get it…you’re hot for each other. Can we move it along, please?”
There it is again. People acting like genZ are the first to say no and protest to things…. This simply isn’t true.
Genz didn’t invent this idea of protesting it . Women against pornography was formed in the 60s. So we know people have been bothered by it for more than one generation and people have tried to act against it.
I don’t think this should be a generation topic. Film makers are by far and large trying to get people to watch their shit using gags and named actors. they use sex and violence in film like capitalists use sugar and salt in food to get people to consume it. It’s a crutch.
I find this so funny, how a lot of “Boomer media” makes such a fuss about discovering that Gen Z ist also just normal people, with some more progressed ideas and ideals but also tired of being overloaded with information and media.
I think part of it now is that they also realize that half of the fads they have been making up about how the youth of the 2000/2010 era with how sex, violence and drugs craving it alledgely was, were just bullshit.
latimes.com
Active