It’s their kink. That’s why Grindr gets overwhelmed every time they gather. I work construction and it’s the same thing there they always rally around one guy (usually a foreman) and compete for his attention. We had a foreman one time who was conventionally handsome an id say pretty cool and I shit you not dudes were talking about how he edges before working out and they all started doing it and then somehow they got a picture of his dick and we’re going around shoving it in eachothers faces and calling eachother gay “because they looked at this guy’s dick”. They started drinking the same energy drinks that he drank. I wish someone would do a psychological study on it is weird. It’s a thing
#AreTheStraightsOK
I can’t find it now, but I once read an article that said that bc patriarchy devalues women and our opinions and centers men, it results in straight (and non straight men I suppose) centering other men in their lives. Since only men’s opinions matter, men do everything for the approval of other men, usually the “manliest” man. For example, “trophy wives” are usually more about showing off to other men rather than bc the husband actually wants to be married to or is even super attracted to her. Or some men will pretend to not be attracted to a woman if their male friends have deemed her unattractive. Basically, they have done studies on it and if you search for homosexual desire and patriarchy you can find some (though I can’t find the specific one I’m thinking of)
Yes this makes sense and I’ve seen it constantly it’s really weird how much their lives are all about impressing other men
FUCKING LMAO 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Most people feel lost and stay lost, pretending to be on a path others gave them, especially when they don’t practice the hard part of life: figuring out how to self actualize
+1…That is fucked up. Union or non-union construction? The idiots would stand on top of a 12 ft ladder for their foreman.
Union but my local is basically a white supremisist gang it’s gross
Because their dads were abusive authoritarians, so they have daddy issues.
This isn’t an excuse they’re just weak. Many have authoritarian fathers or parents and come out vowing to never be like that or support that behavior.
Those ones often found better role models or support groups outside the home, such as friends, teachers, etc.
The ones who don’t find that have far less opportunity to experience the growth required to break the cycle.
They’re the ones who don’t.
I think they’re born weak too, but both things can be explanations without it being an excuse.
Small town lifer here, the worst children I knew grew up very predictably. IMO, most people don’t really change much at all with age.
Everyone is born weak, what kind of statement is that? Babies are not strong.
Who a person becomes as an adult is a product of their development throughout their formative years. There are many factors in that, so it’s far more complex than simple linear correlations, but overall having a shitty upbringing deeply contributes to a person’s likelihood of turning out shitty.
The cycle breakers who overcome it do in spite of it all, and are the exceptions rather than the rule. They also likely found support in other areas of their life whether that’s through friends, councilors, mentors, therapists, teachers, or what have you.
But someone who found none of those refuges would have extreme difficulty overcoming patterns ingrained through upwards of two decades of narcissistic abuse and emotional neglect starting from infancy.
It’s not because they were “born flawed,” and that’s a very problematic assumption. It’s also essentialist, so not very post-modern of you.
I don’t debate those who lead and end with insults.
What were the insults? Everything I said was factual.
I didn’t call you a dumbass, I said your statement was essentialist and therefore not very post-modern. That’s simply true, and if you think that’s insulting then that’s because you can’t handle being corrected.
And if you think saying “babies are weak” is insulting, then you have very flawed expectations for humanity. From your original statement, you said some people are born weak. I corrected you by saying everyone is born weak.
So if anything, you’re the one being insulting. Because you have no understanding for sympathy for the helpless state in which we were all introduced into this world.
They don’t, sadly, and what makes it worse is the endless amounts of religious indoctrination and bullshit media constantly feeding us the narrative that people in general grow and learn over time and become better people, and that sentiment has been internalized at every possible level of society at large, but (as a general rule, nothing is universal) things couldn’t be further from the truth.
I’m glad my Pop is a badass and taught me how to think and not what to think.
They don’t, sadly, and what makes it worse is the endless amounts of religious indoctrination and bullshit media constantly feeding us the narrative that people in general grow and learn over time and become better people, and that sentiment has been internalized at every possible level of society at large, but (as a general rule, nothing is universal) things couldn’t be further from the truth.
I agree with you here of course, quite strongly.
I’m glad my Pop is a badass and taught me how to think and not what to think.
So that’s the thing I think about a lot. How much influence did he really truly have on you vs you both just happening to be like-minded to begin with? Ties in with my thoughts on free will vs determinism too. My belief in a weak mind being born doomed now comes into this picture. But I’m one of those annoying compatibilists because my own father has moved slowly from staunch conservative to centrist over time. Maybe only because I’m his kid, who really knows. I’m 35 and only just got him to finally admit he was pretending to be Christian to stay with my mother. I always suspected.
Here’s where I’m coming from, so the perspective can hopefully makes more sense:
-
born in a monocultural conservative town 1990 99.5% white people. Seriously I can only remember one black kid in school.
-
my mother co-founded her own Baptist church.
-
I wasn’t rebellious, and I even attended youth groups and bible camps regularly.
-
my 2nd earliest memory I can still recall is fucking surreal: In a public elementary school, the principal lead a morning prayer once a week in the morning gym assembly. Everyone. Everyone stood up student/admin/teacher/janitor. Everyone bowed their heads to repeat the principal’s prayer. Except one of my classmates one day, she remained seated. This blew my mind. I sat down with her, and she gave me a wide grin. Who knows why, but this moment was cemented into my skull surrounded by the overwhelming majority and choosing to sit out of their mindless tradition.
I never at any point believed in any gods, nor was I at any point a conservative. How could this be given the environment I was raised in?
I think it’s simply because I was born with innate critical thinking. I also did not believe what anyone not even my own parents when they told me things at face value. The early internet and the library was where I went to see if something I was told was true or not.
~80% of humans are theists, it’s incredibly sad.
I don’t think there is a born weak mind in that sense, it seems like an out or an excuse to me, we are all the same animal, and I don’t think will is purely innate or nurture, all things are a combination of both with different ratios depending on the person.
I can for sure say my dad had a severe impact on me questioning things and doing my best to find objectivity before I form my opinion on things, which lead me to planting the seed of rebellion and defiance in myself. Be it religion, politics, philosophy, authority, or what have you, he never put his views into my head about it and encouraged me to examine things more deeply when I wasn’t. Indoctrination is a bitch, and he bent over backwards to make sure he was doing the opposite. A lot of personality is innate and unchangeable, but if you’re not fucked by that then ideology and opinions are malleable, it just depends on weather or not you’ve learned to be molded by others or yourself, and religious indoctrination from birth fucks up all of the gauges if there isn’t anything else to add influence, which I saw a lot as I also grew up around a very religious community that often shunned me for questioning, I was luckily taught self definition.
I"m not convinced all our blank slate minds are all born equal but I appreciate the responses it’s good food for thought.
-
Adding to shit post .
Downloaded. Definitely going to use this next time I see some CHUD making wildly sweeping statements about trans ppl.
Fear.
They rally around figures who look strong because they’re afraid of losing social status, or feeling xenophobia due to racism, or insecure over economic concerns. As always, everything is projection with these dipshits. They let fear drive them into the sort of groupthink mob they accuse liberals of being.
I sorta understand, I guess. But having president whatshisnuts as your figure of manliness is already a joke in itself, but elevating him to a messiah like figure is just crazy.
Helps if your world view is shaped by people who are continually telling you that he’s a figure of manliness, while constantly playing off your fear and insecurity for profit and political gain.
EDIT: It’s also a very unrealistic standard of what it means to be a man, almost a caricature. It’s a masculine ideal rooted in myths of the “common-sense everyman hero” who’s wisdom is more valuable than other’s knowledge, instincts more accurate than other’s intellect, and cunning able to overcome other’s skill. He’s a man who’s anger and will can overcome insurmountable odds, and who’s “rough-around-the edges” personality is more attractive than practiced social graces. There’s no need for growth or change, because our hero needs nothing more than the innate qualities he already possesses to thrive, and because of that failure is never his fault.
It’s the aesthetic of romanticized cowboys, gangsters, renegade cops, and retired spec-ops, a domesticated version of 1980’s gritty action-hero masculinity adapted for group membership. It’s always framed as bucking authority and going against the grain, even though conformity is required to be one of the “good guys”. Being low on the totem pole allows you to gain the virtue of being a simple man with a simple life, or being the trusted sergeant “who really makes things happen around here”, but doesn’t mean that you’re incapable of rising to any occasion just because you have guts. Washboard abs or hard work are only important when they can be used to show how weak and ineffective your opponents are, but what’s really important is that you’re able to dismiss, demean, deny, and destroy anything that doesn’t conform to the right way of doing things to gain the accolades you’re due and save yourself the embarrassment of having to admit your hero fantasies aren’t true.
Again, it’s ridiculous to apply this ideal to the bloated orange, but it’s an image he cultivates. His personal mythology is embodying that ideal and gaining massive success in every endeavor because of it. It allows his failings to be used as evidence that he’s “just like us”, and not as examples of his overall lack of redeeming qualities.
But I wouldn’t expect it every really make sense, because at it’s core it’s just a bullshit justification for getting whatever they want with as little effort as possible.
That’s absurd AF but it actually does make sense in a weird, twisted worldview sort of way. Thanks for the explanation!
They call this move the handjob dance.
I feel 21% less masculine after watching that. But that’s probably just an anomaly idk.
Air dicking
Dave Bautista said it looked like he was jacking off two giraffes.
As funny as it sounds I don’t know enough about giraffe penises to know how accurate that statement is.
- Belief in the concept of an “alpha male” necessitates having a strongman leader.
- Bootlickers need a boot to lick.
True. The problem with the whole “alpha male” leader nonsense in modern age is those leaders are supposed to protect the group, potentially to the death, as the trade off for the status. Most of the goobers stepping up to insert themselves in that role aren’t doing it for a group, just for the desire for the status alone. So really it’s just a bunch of entitled assholes that will sell the group out and run in a heartbeat as soon as they are faced with fulfilling their end of the bargain.
I don’t disagree that it’s about status/power/etc., but they’re doing it for a group, just not our group. If you wanna be part of the 1% you gotta fuck the 99%.
To paraphrase Carlin, it’s a big club and we’re not in it.
That 1% will sell out their own as soon as it makes them money too.
You’re not wrong.
Both excellent points. ಠ_ಠ
They are scared little boys. Their fathers were emotionally (maybe physically) abusive and didn’t give them agency, just expected “respect” (do as I say)
“Man up, sit down
Chin up, pipe down
Socks up, don’t cry
Drink up, just lie
Grow some balls, he said
Grow some balls”
And this is why you’ll never see your father cry
I kissed a boy and I liked it!
I laughed way too hard at this. Ty random internet stranger
For anyone who doesn’t get this reference, do yourself a favor and listen to the album Joy As An Act of Resistance by Idles immediately.
Because part of conservatism is the idea that hierarchies based on who your parents are, and the fact that you’re male, etc. are proper and right.
They want to submit to the people who are correctly above them in the hierarchy, and want the people who are supposed to be below them in the hierarchy to submit to them.
The German philosopher Hannah Arendt asked herself a very similar question when, during the trial of Nazi official and war criminal Adolf Eichmann, she attempted to understand how a human being could be capable of such monstrous atrocities. In this context, she coined the expression “banality of evil.”
It is worth taking a look at her book “Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil,” because her observations in it are, unfortunately, once again highly relevant today.
They are kinda kinky
Covert bottom
They wear bright red hats and are known for putting their mouths anywhere they are told. There’s nothing covert about them.
It’s simple. They are super insecure guys and want to feel big, so they are assholes to women because women are easy targets. They drive massive trucks, love to BBQ and watch sports with other insecure men, but at the same time they lack any real identity and are completely lost without their mommy to take them by their hand. But mommy is a woman, and having your mommy to care for your insecure ass looks stupid to your friends, so you just follow another screaming asshole so you look touch yourself (you do not, you’re a sad piece of garbage and everyone sees it).
woah woah woah
What’s wrong with bbq??
That was my question. I’m working on a brisket as we speak and I don’t plan on watching sports, wearing a red hat, or treating any women like shit.
I also have a truck that I haul shit in, but notice I don’t feel the need to ask what’s wrong with that. I know very fucking well what’s wrong with trucks.
Big Black Quock
The idea that eating dead, half burned animals makes you more of a man. While in fact most meat comes from female animals and is full of estrogen.
If you want proof it’s stupid, listen to RFK jr. his advice. He has an almost full meat diet. Anything this guy says, you should do the exact opposite.
I’m a vegan but I’m not judging people who eat meat. I do however judge people who only do it to compensate their micropenis, to act like they’re a real man. While they can’t even drill a hole in a wall, repair a dripping tap or patch a bicycle tire.
You do know that it’s possible to like a style of food without subscribing to a stereotype?
Just because there are people who need giant pickup trucks for work doesn’t mean every guy needs one.
I’m talking about the behavior of a certain type of person. I’m not saying everyone who likes to BBQ has a micropenis. I’m just saying people with a micropenis do it to feel more manly.
So, do you know a stereotype can do a certain act just because of their stereotype, without the act being bad on itself?
He said he eats meats and “ferments”. What is a “ferment” because I have never heard that particular word used to describe a type of food.
Also, BBQ is not at all the issue here. Not in any way.
Yoghurt is a fermented product. So is soy sauce.
So is vinegar
I’d like to point out that grilling and barbecue are different things. Most guys do not barbecue. Grilling is extremely common, though.
Ok that changes everything
Great explanation but I also love BBQ. Please don’t bring BBQ into this. It’s not BBQ’s fault.
I like to BBQ too, although no longer with meat.
Not every person who likes to BBQ immediately is an insecure asshole. It’s just that insecure assholes like to BBQ to feel manly.
Why is it ok to put every single person that votes a certain way into a box? I would also like to point out that Canada is not the USA. Canadian conservatives share very few values with their American counterparts
Huh, I guess you don’t know folks who have fox news on all the time, then. It’s pretty common in Alberta. The values are pretty in sync after years of that.
People who have no clue of how the world works vote a certain way. They put themselves in a certain box by voting dumb.
Both sides think the exact same thing about each other. One is glued to FOX and the other to CNN. How is one more right then the other? This is all by design because they want us divided to more easily control. The elites are the problem because they are our governments and more.
I get what you’re saying but saying “both sides are the same” is just sort of lazy/sloppy analysis.
A more accurate approximation is far older, something like: “we’re seeing 1/3 of the country attempt to kill another 1/3 of the country while another 1/3 watches.”
And you’re right this is due to scapegoating by the wealthy but if a third of the country didn’t want to murder another third of the country then the wealthy would not find it nearly as easy to divide us.
Just destroying their wealth wont fix anything at this point. You also have to destroy a media system they spent about 70 years and two generations building or we will simply find ourselves in the same spot very shortly
Neither side is right. The whole system is fucked up. It’s just a 2 party system, how is any party going to represent a large part of society? The Dems are right wing, the Reps are alt right. The system is fucked up. But the Reps try to make everything even more fucked up the most, as they want life for themselves to be better at the cost of the lives of others. While being too dumb to understand that when the largest part of your society lives in poverty without education and health care, the entire society will collapse and is going to suffer from the massive grave they just helped digging. Including their own selfish rich ass.
One is glued to FOX and the other to CNN
One definitely is glued to FOX, the other is more scattered across news sources, as the Reps generally are rather dumb shortsighted people and the rest of the population who doesn’t vote Reps range from dumb CNN glued people to intelligent people who know better but have no other option than the Dems, just not to have to vote for Reps.
How is one more right then the other?
One side tends to seek objective truths.
It’s because they probably had shitty Dads
Because in reality they are betas, they call themselves alphas but they are easily manipulated and they are lap dogs of powerful people
They are literally betas by their own definition of social hierarchy.
They like hierarchy because it means there are people below them in that hierarchy.
Ole Gavin McInnes takin a dildo up the ass to “own teh libs” sure shut me the fuck up.
I mean, the first time I saw that I was speechless for a good 5 mins…
