• 0 Posts
  • 83 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 14th, 2024

help-circle







  • That second link is actually great

    It’s really easy, on the left and just in politics generally, to think of things as being zero-sum. So there’s this fear that if we start helping men, then we’ll just have forgotten about women and there won’t be space or time for women anymore. I think that’s a mistake. We should be able to do two things at once. We can recognize that both women and men are members of our society and we should want to help everyone.

    100% this is how I see it.

    There’s also the fact that because progressives in the mainstream have not really taken up the masculinity question, the people who have taken it up tend to be on the right and often they tend to be problematic figures. You see incels and men’s rights activists and Ben Shapiro burning Barbies, and there’s a fear that if you speak up for men, everyone’s going to be like, You seem too interested in this. Are you one of them? It’s a branding problem.

    I really hate that “men’s rights activist” is automatically a bad thing, and is even written here as bad. When you push that it’s sexist to put forward men’s issues, it feels inevitable it will turn men away. We have issues, we suck at building community lately, but we need to be able to talk about them without being shamed or chastised or branded. To the point above, it does not take away from women, at all, to let men have a space too.

    We kind of created this space where the good men were too scared to talk, and the ones who did are Andrew Tate types pushing the most vapid interpretation of masculinity.

    i.e. Tate exists because he’s such a piece of shit he wasn’t worried about speaking out. Tate thinks his counter culture is good and truthfully it’s why he’s been successful. He’s effectively a voice in an empty space which gets him lots of ears.

    With Tate, unlike Peterson, there’s no pretension to anything virtuous. It’s just, Hey, the world hates you. The world wants to make you weak, wants to make you soft, so take what you can get, crush your enemies, abuse women, double down on everything they hate about you. It’s the weak person’s vision of a strong person. It’s the 19-year-old Nietzsche reader who didn’t make it past the preface.

    That’s exactly how I feel. It’s empty junk food masculinity.

    Masculinity to me is to build and mold yourself, to care about the right things and people, to be confident in your own inner strength, and to be supportive to those around me. It’s a perspective rooted in archetypes yes, and also Augustan stoic philosophy.

    It’s okay to want fast cars and hot girls, but I think it’s pretty weak to make those outward rewards the core of yourself.


  • I also call myself an egalitarian for the reason that I believe all people are created equal, and deserve equal rights and opportunities.

    I was in high school when things like making boys take anti-rape pledges and saying “not all men” would get you in trouble. It really felt like I was reduced by my gender to a rapist and an abuser by default.

    There were also men’s rights groups that got massively shutdown and harassed, which upset me as a man who has issues. It felt like there wasn’t and still isn’t a place to discuss things like men’s mental health, suicide rates, declining male education rates, societal double standards, and how family law can be biased and where it can be improved. Specifically issues like how men get punished for taking parental leave to a much higher degree than women, or that my single-father brother wasn’t able to take his son to curricular activities because they were run by “mommy groups”, and being a single dad isn’t being a mom (sure there’s a place for mom focused groups, but they were the default).

    The people pushing the “kill all men” aren’t feminists, they’re just sexists/supremacists. If they were in the position of men for the last X hundred years they’d be exactly like the patriarchy.








    1. Extreme amounts of energy needed for large items, but it seems like Earth has transporter quotas, so presumably they enforce energy budgets (based on DS9 Sisko using his transporter budget)
    2. Not all materials like latinum can be replicated
    3. Materials like dilithium are seemingly not viable to replicate, probably due to it being an incredibly wasteful process
    4. Many dilithium byproducts are unstable controlled substances, so at some point Starfleet would interfere to prevent the creation of trilithium or other unstable substances.
    5. I don’t know if you need antimatter, but I don’t think you could replicate it. You could replicate the machinery needed to produce it though.
    6. The Federation does have industrial replicators but they seem to be treated as controlled assets they rarely give out or provide access to. So they might meddle if you start building these.