🐱TheCat

I use Firefox with ad blockers to watch YouTube. Chrome seems to be allowing them to block my ad blocker

Also west virginia. Why do they know about west virginia?!?!? Who told them?

yeah, but people not in the know think it just means ‘prudent government spending’. What it actually means is funnel as much money from the government/taxpayer to the existing rich as possible. I think we are saying the same thing, cheers

it should result in reducing the deficit - which republicans don’t and democrats do.

all the GOP does is cut the taxes of rich and raise the taxes of the middle class, while running up the deficit overall.

I have no idea what that analogy means in the context of this conversation.

I was just playing a semantic gotcha game at that point.

at least you can admit it.

As for the difference, I wouldn’t call validating the perspective that capitalism is fucking us ‘coddling’ soley because of the fact that I think it’s true and actionable

As opposed to the fictions being presented by PUAs that women are meant to be dominated, which I obviously find untrue thus the term ‘coddling’.

Shame we’re fighting each other instead of the rich, is my point.

It’s SO IRONIC that just one sentence previously you advocated for coddling their perspective

Where?

My whole fucking point is that these guys shouldn’t be coddled. If I made a typo somewhere saying they should be, I want to fix it. But I think you may have misread again.

But, again: While abolishing capitalism would probably solve the issue in itself, addressing it is a perfectly valid step on that path. And addressing it requires not denying the perspective of those kids,

attacking capitalism. Addressing it requires attacking capitalism, and some men would rather attack women. Coddling their perspective is also not required. They must wake to the fact that the rich stole their future, not women.

It’s SO IRONIC that you typed all that shit about Tate, who you admit was poor and economically struggling and WEAPONIZED men’s hatred of women to make himself RICH, but then say he’s not an example of an older man pied pipering younger men into hating women out of a desire to solve his economic woes. It sounds to me like thats exactly what he did and you typed it out yourself. We just see things from opposite perspectives entirely.

edit: I’m being combative now but I don’t care:

Counter-question: Why is the left so bad at convincing people to act in their own self-interest?

Maybe its because the left is more likely to be women, and men have a hard fucking time listening to women for some reason. Maybe it’s not a problem with ‘the left’ at all. Do you need some statistics to back this up?

But in reality its because right-wing is associated with authoritarian attitudes so it’s just easier to get a right wing person in line than a left wing person.

totally disagree with you. The older men pied pipering these young men away are entirely doing it out of grievances about economic status, which has family units falling apart as a side effect (most men can’t afford to support a stay at home partner).

The young men are buying it, and joining right-wing organizations which prop up the economic status quo for the rich, hurt their own economic prospects, and do nothing to solve the root problem.

You seem to get close to the truth when you admit the thing about “capitalism not giving a fuck about externalities”, but I can’t tell if you think that’s okay because of a naturalistic fallacy, or if you’re admitting that women’s labor is systemically undervalued by capitalism and it needs to be addressed.

it’s always funny to hear men focus on the education part of the equation, which pays nothing, and when its shown that women statistically do better they see as ‘unnatural’ / ‘needing fixing’ …

… but ignore or dismiss the career part of the equation, which makes up the majority of adult life, is the portion that generates resources via pay, and is the portion that men statistically do better at.

Maybe its a side effect of the young men complaining basically having not had experienced all their privileges yet, because they’ve been in the education phase.

Hopefully you won’t tell me you think one is natural and one is not.

The reason we get a backsliding is because (imo) we focus on elevating women too much.

You didn’t read this as ‘we should focus on women less and men more’?

Would you agree with the statement ‘society materially still does much more for men, equality has not been reached, and supporting the fiction that women now have ‘more support than men’ is harmful to women’ ?

You don’t see how that entire comment is scapegoating women for men’s issues - which largely derive from lost economic status, and not women?

edit: let me spell it out. There are 2 economic theories I see a lot - workers are suffering because the rich have hoarded the wealth, and men are suffering because women have too many resources. Guess which idea that comment supports? Guess who actually benefits from that rhetoric? It ain’t men.

So you are arguing for me to show empathy to young men, as Im being blamed for their problems, and the commentor is advocating that resources be taken from me?

seems you expect quite a lot of empathy and understanding from me and none from the other commentor, or young men.

conservatives boycotting something: ‘go woke, go broke!’

conservatives being boycotted: ‘whaaaaa cancel culture!’

except for of women’s bodies, more of that please

what else are they doing that you’re for? please be specific

‘fiscal conservative’ = supports tax cuts for the rich because they believe in trickle-down theory, still, somehow

You’re right, I now see what was someone else.

What confuses me is that you read a comment chain where a man told a woman that the reason that men are suffering is that women have too many resources, which I rebutted. And that made you want to argue with ME.

Why let the sexism slide from your fellow man but try to police my response to it?

Oh please, don’t project on me.

The reason we get a backsliding is because (imo) we focus on elevating women too much

Here’s where you crossed the line from ‘helping men’ to ‘blaming women’. These mens problems are their own, not the fault of women. And you saying that women are the reason they aren’t getting enough attention is exactly the type of sexist shit that leads to incels.

I wish the rest of the conservatives would agree with you, but here they are banging on about ‘women shouldn’t be able to divorce their husbands’ and whining online about ‘the great replacement’ because we don’t want to fuck them

Check again, conservatives are no longer fiscally conservative and have not been for several decades. That facade has entirely fallen away to reveal the real:

• fundamentalist christians
• racists
• filthy rich people who want tax cuts for the rich (do not confuse this with being fiscally conservative)

literally everyone is failing the young disenfranchised men

ftfy. your whole comment is just an example of the fact that when ‘you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression’. I know thats not what these men want to hear but there’s no other way to deal with. I live in a country that just removed rights to a safe abortion , and billionaires are fucking over the entire working class women and men, but please tell me more about how ‘women having too much power’ is the problem

you are specifically talking about young men with outdated ideas about labor division based on gender. They want their bang maid and they are pissed they don’t get it. Guys who accept that everyone has to work, so everyone has to do housework don’t have trouble dating. Straight women are dating someone. So either young men and women are struggling with dating, or the struggles of one demographic of men (white conservatives) are vastly overblown (by them).