Is he right, Zig Forums? This post was too short, so I guess I'll explain that...

Christian Cruz
Christian Cruz

Is he right, Zig Forums?
This post was too short, so I guess I'll explain that I am not a troll, just here to start a discussion.

Attached: 46an83qdd9b21(2).jpg (42.14 KB, 700x444)

Other urls found in this thread:

rt.com/op-ed/448682-traditional-masculinity-toxic-universe/
nytimes.com/2018/10/02/magazine/is-it-ok-to-press-your-spouse-to-have-a-vasectomy-before-you-ditch-him.html

Levi Morales
Levi Morales

This is just a thinly veiled
lol you buy clothes and eat food, you live off capitalism! No criticism allowed, sweaty!

John Garcia
John Garcia

Literally nobody is implying that, retard. The tweet is making fun of progressives/>liberals, not actual communists.
t. OP

Ryder Clark
Ryder Clark

He is. Companies don't care about progressiveness, they just fallow trends.

Gavin Myers
Gavin Myers

He's right as far as Western liberals go. But it's just advertising. A private corporation cannot "care for issues", their shareholders will only care about their bottom line, their profit.

Ryder Young
Ryder Young

we are living in an era of woke capitalism in which companies pretend to care about social justice

ok

to sell products to people who pretend to hate capitalisim

no. people receptive to "woke" branding don't hate capitalism. if they did the branding wouldn't matter.

Brayden Sanders
Brayden Sanders

Agree. Most of progressiveness is aimed a 'more female cows' progressives and not anti-capitalist socialist.

Owen Carter
Owen Carter

no. people receptive to "woke" branding don't hate capitalism. if they did the branding wouldn't matter.
That's the whole point, it's exactly what he's saying. They pretend to hate it.

Lucas Jenkins
Lucas Jenkins

not one word was wrong

Elijah Martin
Elijah Martin

Yes, he is.

Carter Russell
Carter Russell

There do exist so called "activist shareholders". Some banks and pension funds nowadays, large investment parties, also now advertise their own avoidance of investments in weapons industry, or their investment options in green energy, that sorta thing.
But, here is almost the exact same problem as what ethical slaveholders meant towards the abolishment of slavery. A small group of powerful but at least seemingly ethical humans end up serving as an argument for capitalism.
Many of these people end up being surrounded by greedy people that push them into soul-destroying decisions.
Some modern protests also focus on getting organizations to deinvest their money from the unethical banks and funds.
Activist shareholders need to be made to realize that there are better things to bet their money on, like a union of countermovements that work against the corporate power, with a bias toward the controversial ones (for spectacle and popular support ofc)

Gavin Sullivan
Gavin Sullivan

I can tell just by looking at the guy that he's making fun of commies too.

He's too dumb to realise that the Starbucks meme is totally invalid.

Attached: starbucks-meme-feudalism.jpg (281.42 KB, 1639x774)

Elijah Powell
Elijah Powell

Hit the nail on the head.

Blake Lewis
Blake Lewis

not him but starbucks sucks, if you use it you have no right to complain about capitalism.

Juan Miller
Juan Miller

Not sure if burger liberals can be said to even pretend to hate capitalism.

Matthew Martin
Matthew Martin

some do but they say "we need a mix of capitalism and socialism" because they have no idea what socialism actually is.

John Hughes
John Hughes

do you use an iphone?

Oliver Watson
Oliver Watson

if you use an iphone you are by default bourgeois

nokia is the proletariat's brand

Lincoln Morgan
Lincoln Morgan

it's one thing if you use a smartphone for its utility but if you're an actual retard who buys the 1000$ phone as soon as it comes out (and own anything without a headphone jack) you should kill yourself.
no I mean it, things would be better if these people killed themselves.

Carter Perry
Carter Perry

if you use an iphone you are by default bourgeois
That’s funny, I’ve seen a lot of black proles use them. I’m not sure why people care so much about policing the kind of use-values people consume when Marx critiqued this “critique” of working-class consumerism in vol one

A lot of workers buy things things like expensive clothes, phones, shoes etc. because those are the kind of luxuries they actually can afford. Very few luxury brands could probably stay in business without prole consumption.

I’ve literally seen guys that probably own million-dollar houses walking around in t-shirts, shorts and cheap new balances. Zizek is right that Capitalism is a religious force and that capitalists are in many respects motivated by this rather than mere self-gratification.

Warren Buffet eats off the dollar menu at McD’s every day for breakfast.

James Hernandez
James Hernandez

You have a fair point there, Costa actually pays taxes and there's bound to be one right next to the Starbucks within 1 street.

Dylan Nguyen
Dylan Nguyen

nokia is the proletariat's brand

Excuse me but no, everyone knows that by buying Huawei you're supporting Dengist thought

Carter Murphy
Carter Murphy

Chill out, fren

Parker Torres
Parker Torres

Company: Haha look at how progressive we are we have a gay/interracial couple in our commercials
Progressives: Aww that's so cute and progressive! What were we mad about again?

Hudson Hernandez
Hudson Hernandez

Whereas the more reasonable response is to try flush your razor and say that gillette is trying enact 'male genocide' (yes famous right wingers said this).

Austin King
Austin King

The irony of people being pissed about Gillette is that non-controversy overshadowed the APA's decision to define "traditional masculinity" as toxic- I'm not even making that up.

The same organization that defined homosexuality as a mental illness for decades and transsexuality as a mental illness up until very recently will now tell you, or your shrink rather, that you need unlearn masculinity.

Cooper Clark
Cooper Clark

Yeah, I saw that, it's very wrongheaded thinking that's for sure. How about they address men's issues by not insulting men.

Cameron Carter
Cameron Carter

What if I counter one non-controversy with another non-controversy
Or are you seriously suggesting there's no problem with the sort of masculinity that gets thrown around - largely consumption based, sex based, encouraging violence, and entirely focused on shallow attributes.

Samuel Young
Samuel Young

The problem is mostly with framing and definitions - I would be happy with identifying the harm of what I would call brutish, chauvinistic, reactionary behaviour, but calling it 'toxic masculinity' is needlessly antagonistic considering the times we live in.

Eli Miller
Eli Miller

Can agree with you on that but I'm not entirely sure what would be labelled instead that wouldn't antagonize that crowd.

Joshua Brooks
Joshua Brooks

It will antagonise some blatant Nazis either way but with proper terminology that wasn't needlessly offensive maybe we could finally move on as a society. But then again creating pointless bickering is the point isn't it?

Nicholas Bennett
Nicholas Bennett

But then again creating pointless bickering is the point isn't it?
Seeing as the ultimate goal by a lot of groups and people is "discussion and awareness" and nothing more, it sure is.

Andrew Diaz
Andrew Diaz

I meant more that idpol is pushed by TPTB to destroy genuine debate and divide the workers but that works too I guess.

Josiah Morgan
Josiah Morgan

Same concept different labels. ;)

Connor Sanders
Connor Sanders

What if I counter a controversy that I'm not familiar with by declaring it a non-controversy without any investigation
Just love nu-Zig Forums these days. I read through the report it was pure ideology–it honestly felt more like a giant Tumblr post than anything resembling a balanced scientific investigation of the matter at hand. It was in the main liberal ideology with footnotes with splattering of bullshit self-help. Ascribing men's higher suicide and murder rates to mere toxic masculinity is just bullshit self-help that is not one whit more substantial than what Jordan Peterson does with his clean your room schtick.

Only the APA will now tell your shrink that the best course is to help you see yourself as both a beneficiary of patriarchy and a victim of it–not making that up at all.

As Zizek points out:
The contours of this shift become clear the moment we take a closer look at the list of features supposed to characterize “toxic masculinity”: suppressing emotions and masking distress, unwillingness to seek help, a propensity to take risks even if this involves a danger of self-harm.

Which raises the question: what is so specifically “masculine” about this list?

Does it not fit much more as a simple act of courage in a difficult situation where, to do the right thing, you have to suppress emotions because you cannot rely on any help but take the risk and act, even if this means exposing yourself to harm? Obviously, in our age of Politically Correct conformism, such a stance poses a danger.

But What is replacing courage?
rt.com/op-ed/448682-traditional-masculinity-toxic-universe/

And, all this, from the organization that helped green-light torture for the US army. Yes, perhaps we could chalk it up to simple hypocrisy but what if their actually ideologically consistent? No, heterotopia of differénce that liberals admire could survive an Islamic fundamentalist state.

For our purposes, no revolution could ever occur in America or anywhere else without quite a bit of stoicism.

Cameron Stewart
Cameron Stewart

but with proper terminology that wasn't needlessly offensive maybe we could finally move on as a society.
Bro it's called "toxic masculinity." It's not implying masculinity is toxic, it's literally trying to convey toxic aspects of masculinity you fucking brainlet.

Austin Flores
Austin Flores

nu-anything
it honestly FELT
You can go now, you've expired.

Carson Reyes
Carson Reyes

I understand that's the theory but in reality it's been used as a bludgeon (along with the rest of feminism) that we really need to just move on from accusatory, gender based words like that. I mean it's like, all women's problems are blamed on the patriarchy and toxic masculinity, and all men's problems are blamed on the patriarchy and toxic masculinity. When that's used as an example of 'oh feminism isn't anti-men' it gets pretty grating and poisons the whole debate. I mean how often do you hear the term 'toxic femininity' exactly outside of people saying it in this very argument?

We need to move on to egalitarianism desperately.

Attached: anti-male-shaming.jpg (481.09 KB, 1900x1440)

Nicholas Thomas
Nicholas Thomas

it's a /v/irgin mra

Attached: 5gNFLff.jpg (117.04 KB, 1280x720)

Jordan Rivera
Jordan Rivera

And here was me trying to have an honest discussion.

BTW, that's a code purple.

Noah Phillips
Noah Phillips

<it honestly FELT
If I say that it was a giant Tumblr post would that make any difference for you, autist?

Jonathan Morris
Jonathan Morris

Attached: noargumentsfound.png (245.92 KB, 891x1280)

Carson Gray
Carson Gray

"feminism is being used by women to attack men" meme
muh toxic femininity (literally the main topic of feminism)
Honest discussion indeed.

Brayden Barnes
Brayden Barnes

im a debate dweeb that thinks you can deduct ad hominem points irl

Angel Hughes
Angel Hughes

muh toxic femininity (literally the main topic of feminism
That's an extremely generous characterization. To the extent that debate even exists its a side-show at best.

Charles Ramirez
Charles Ramirez

feminism is nothing but male bashing
why are people saying toxic masculinity is bad, there's nothing wrong with being male (has literally never read an article on the topic)
we shouldn't label any behaviors specific to masculinity that cause harm to society (including men) lest we offend pussies

Christopher Long
Christopher Long

'toxic femininity'
there's already a term for that
'internalize misogyny'

Austin Walker
Austin Walker

Capitalism is a better method of oppression to enforce the weird social shit that neoliberals want. If you're selling "male tears" coffee mugs at a 300% profit you're not a communist.

Leo Martinez
Leo Martinez

If you were able to discuss anything without going off initial reactions and basing your entire argument around that initial reaction - absolutely.
Unfortunately hun, you can't. So fuck off. Hopefully your first reaction to me was a longlasting one.

Aiden Thomas
Aiden Thomas

<sperging out over a lot of things I didn't say
Lol okay, bud. I'm aware that feminism has had its moments of self-criticism of the female gender that in some instances has went even into MRA-tier territory. A certain strain of structuralist feminism in the 80s critiqued the always-believe-the-woman tripe we see and what some might dub police-state feminism.
<we need police servants of the bourgeois state to make sure that consent is being properly observed at all times–these men with guns protect us from bad men!

However, all that being said, the critique of femininity has never approached the kind of ruthless critique and scorn (and, yes, many honest feminists have admitted there's scorn there) on men.

As the poster said above, what could be called "toxic femininity" you almost never even hear discussion of it. Everything bad that women do is either the mere fault of bad individual women or as this post alluded to:

internalized misogyny
And that kind of strikes to the root of what's bad about feminism as it currently exists in general. They can only explain bad women by arguing that they're manipulated either directly or psychologically by a bad society. They can never really be bad on their own terms. Or, maybe they can, if say they say something insulting to a transperson but the jury is still out.

It's not that wanting better conditions for women is wrong but rather that feminism as it currently exists is just a collection of specious hypothesis and concepts, many of them conflicting, most of them unprovable.

Ayden Anderson
Ayden Anderson

But emotions and initial reactions are good now, right? After all were all in the process of deconstructing toxic masculinity now. Subjectivity is a female trait that we all have to learn to embrace rather than denigrate, sweetie :)

But my main impression of you is that you're a typical twitter-leftist whose "arguments" mainly come down to insulting and nitpicking. So in actuality I kinda doubt my first reaction to you will be long-lasting, as you hope, because there are many people just like you.

And, no, I didn't base my entire argument off that reaction. It's pretty clear that you either do not read what you react to or just go in for the easiest strawman possible.

I apologize in advance if my impressions of you cause any negative feelings in your person. I wouldn't want to feel inadequate in any way or to feel like your abilities and personhood are challenged. I'm sure you feel like you are a very intelligent person and I'm sure that you are in your own special way but I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree 🤷🏻‍♀️

Cooper Allen
Cooper Allen

Toxic masculinity is just the same logic, though. That men aren't bad people, but rather, they are manipulated directly or psychologically by a bad society. And whether you believe in the feminist hypothesis or not, it is 100% true that people are products of their environment.

Wyatt Murphy
Wyatt Murphy

it is 100% true that people are products of their environment.
Very true. This actually was a mistake on my part what I should have said is that their manipulated by bad men/patriarchy–which would be more in-line with the feminist thesis.

While I'm sure that patriarchy may have had a negative effect on the development of women's personalities I'm not sure I find the argument that convincing. Like is a big-stabbing careerist woman the product of internalized misogyny or has she merely internalized capitalism?

Although I generally disdain using very exceptional cases as evidence, I have to wonder if something like what happened here can be described as "internalized misogyny" or merely something else. Would the friend be so conflicted about keeping the secret if the roles were reversed? Ya know, I'm really not sure, but I do know how public opinion would react
nytimes.com/2018/10/02/magazine/is-it-ok-to-press-your-spouse-to-have-a-vasectomy-before-you-ditch-him.html

Bentley Long
Bentley Long

*Or both perhaps?

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Confirm your age

This website may contain content of an adult nature. If you are under the age of 18, if such content offends you or if it is illegal to view such content in your community, please EXIT.

Enter Exit

About Privacy

We use cookies to personalize content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyze our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our advertising and analytics partners.

Accept Exit