Correction: After having no success 'Manfluencers" stage interactions with paid women to make them look fuckable.
or to “subtley harass women, stalk them on camera until they relent.”
Does anything good come out of meta?
No
Fuck I hate being male sometimes. What swamp do these skeezy sexist MAGA guys crawl out of?
This particular sleaze is definitely male perpetuated and worth calling out. But shittiness knows no gender (or age or ethnicity for that matter.)
Well, he’s right
It’s fun being deeply ashamed of your gender because some of us are filth and scum.
These fuckers harm everyone with their actions. Wish we could do something actionable about it.
Okay, I feel like this needs to be addressed as well: this, like, public self-flagellation is not useful either. I have never once been ashamed of being a man.
The problem that men have here is cultural and systemic, it’s expressed with statistics and social norms—it really, really has nothing to do with you or me specifically.
If you’ve already done the work of recognizing that negging women is extremely rude, then you’ve already improved as a person. There’s no reason to be self-loathing about it.
I didn’t say that I was ashamed of myself, I said I was ashamed of men and the association they cast on me.
You’re kinda enabling that behavior by advocating against vocalizing how shitty it is.
Oh, hold on, I am absolutely not against bullying these people mercilessly. I’m probably meaner to them than you are, if I were just guessing.
The thing that I don’t want people to do is treat a cultural critique as if it were a personal one. A lot of the pushback that you’ll see from the fragile male types is just manifested insecurity over the fact that they think they can’t go up and talk to a woman without her splashing her drink in their face. The critique is just describing the currents of the ocean, but they will treat it as if it were a personal attack because what you’re really arguing with is their hurt feelings.
I don’t agree with passing off their behavior as “cultural”. I am ashamed of men because some of them are reprehensible, and some of them want to ignore how reprehensible those ones are or explain it away.
I choose to embrace feeling deeply ashamed at how we’ve allowed the worst of us to form the general opinion of us and vocalize that routinely.
Fuck their insecurities, if they want to be able to go up to a woman without “getting her drink splashed in their face” maybe they should focus harder on fixing the problem so women can generally feel safe with us.
Filming people in public is becoming way to socially acceptable. I hate it.
Cowardice in general has become way too socially acceptable. Actually the norm. If you G-d forbid act so that you can be unambiguously determined as not a coward, then G-d help you.
And cowards understand each other very well. You can even expose them all as cowards, they’ll accept the shame and admit you’re right and all such, and then they’ll still feel victorious, because in a society of cowards cowardice always wins in all ways but one.
Living like “Hagakure” for real is perhaps the only way to preserve your humanity in some life situations, but that won’t lead to happiness. And the author of “Hagakure” refused to commit seppuku when his suzerain died, because “times have changed”.
And meeting people who live by those principles, you damn hard wish they hid or cowered or stepped back that one time that led them to pain for their remaining lives from those not worth their breath.
I’m thinking of a woman, by the way. Men of that quality are far more rare.
Talk about cowardice and you’re sensoring the word “god” lol
Every single ‘manfluencer’ is a closeted loser who specifically wants to take your money and cause you to be alone and miserable like they are. Every time. They should be openly ridiculed and loathed, and I hope this trend just elicits legal action and ends quickly, and that minimal harm is done to the victims in the process.
I dunno. From my experience, just pretending you’re “all that” is enough to make women and girls go crazy.
yeah narcissism can temporarily make one interesting until the other person realizes what they got themself into, thats how people end up in abusive relationships
I bet you the Venn diagram of doing this crap and being incapable of comprehending why women picked the bear is a perfect circle.
What does “picked the bear” mean?
If you are a woman alone in the woods, would you rather come across an unknown man, or a bear? It’s a thought experiment. As a human woman, which represents a greater immanent threat?
The question always struck me as dumb. Because it doesn’t make any attempt to clarify what geographic region this question takes place.
I don’t care what you’re afraid of a man doing, a polar bear is ALWAYS the worse choice.
But not all bears are as aggressive as polar bears. Some bears will run away from you if you chase them. Some bears will end you if you chase them.
Of coarse you can’t determine how dangerous a man is based on region. But you can likely determine which regions have dangerous bears.
Without wading into all the technicalities, could we perhaps agree that if you have to say, “what kind of bear tho’,” that we are already in troubling territory?
It’s ironic we’re dissecting which kind of bear is dangerous, while implicitly accepting the premise that all men are dangerous.
That’s not at all what is implied by the thought experiment. It’s not all men, it’s a random man. And it’s not that they are dangerous, it’s about what feels riskier from a woman’s perspective.
That’s why all the fretting over which kind of bear is missing the point. It’s not about arguing with women that they are wrong, it’s about listening to them and understanding that they have no idea whether the man is the sort that would kill them if they say or do or don’t do the right thing — but the odds are sufficient that all men must be treated like a potential threat.
It’s not all men, it’s a random man. And it’s not that they are dangerous, it’s about what feels riskier from a woman’s perspective.
How is that different? It’s still a prejudice based on somebody’s unalterable trait. The entire premise is a deliberate generalization to place men and wild animals into the same category.
I’ve always thought this is such a generalist scenario, meant to deliberately portray all men as dangerous and categorically make them look bad. Imagine we swapped out “men” for another group of people.
meant to deliberately portray all men as dangerous
If this were true, wouldn’t it be dead simple for women to just pick the man? It’s interesting that a lot don’t, right?
Swap the word “man” for another group of people based on generic traits and continue your sweeping generalizations.
Oh, race! I love race.
Do you think it would be wrong for a black person to be a little bit nervous about wandering through some small, predominantly white town in middle America? 'Cause I’m gonna be real, I think that’s probably a valid fear.
That’s an excellent analogy. Zooming out from that scenario, should we welcome the notion of being afraid of being afraid of somebody based on their skin color, because there’s an inherent prejudice of them being dangerous? If so, should we be encouraging each other to vocalize these kinds of prejudices? And by extension, is it acceptable to draw sweeping conclusions about a group of people based on their generic traits?
Because most people have a Disneyfied idea of what animals do. Most people think a bear in the woods wears a red t-shirt and carries around a honeypot.
So, how does choosing a bear with a honeypot make men look bad?
Uh, it doesn’t? It makes the person choosing the bear look like someone whose life consists of entertainment.
If you actually listened to the reasoning that women gave (crazy, right?), they were very clear that with a bear, you know where you stand, but with men, you can’t tell right away whether they’re a danger or pretending to be nice only to be harmful later on.
Any men who get offended by this fact is part of the problem.
It’s kind of a shit take though isn’t it? Animals are potentially dangerous and humans are also potentially dangerous.
The bear will most likely leave you alone if you don’t bother it and so will most humans. No need to bring sexism into it.
Are there non human women?
See Pam Bondi.
as a human woman, which represents a greater imminent threat?
No. This is NOT the takeaway. The bear is clearly the statistically-imminent threat (let’s say a brown bear to ensure it’s hostile and deadly). The point is that you know exactly what the bear will try to do: kill you. You don’t have to greet it, you don’t have to worry about it’s intentions, you don’t have to worry that your social interaction may push the bear over the edge, you don’t have to worry about hurting it’s feelings and risk making it a threat, you don’t have to worry about sending mixed signals, you don’t have to worry about your clothing choice, and you certainly, certainly don’t have to worry about it raping you without witnesses. It simply is a violent threat. You use bear spray and hope you can run far enough, fast enough. You don’t get to make that immediate reaction to a man, between compassion for the innocent, societal pressure to not ostracize men, and legal repercussions if you get it wrong.
