soc-commie systems redistributes resources because it produces & builds nothing and maintains even less than that; Socialism & equity mechanisms works best as programs under capitalism & meritocracy. Why? Same reasons why movements like Feminism work best when under patriarchal systems that provides them capital & resources to even use for their goals.
Those resources don’t just come out of thin air. Capitalism atrophies but it produces, competition drives the machine Vs socialism, like matriarchy is a connective glue but consumes itself into implosion. It atrophies without the production to compensate for it.
Capitalism very scarcely works on it’s own because it drains yet produces to supplant the drain.
But neither matriarchy or socialism are designed to run the program perpetually when it produces nothing but ideals, feelings based goals without the tools to do anything; promises and no production.
At least not on the level of macro-society. Which is why they don’t pioneer U.S.A’s--- that equity & socialism shit shows up AFTER the harder work is done; funny how that works, right?
Only small scale flexible ecosystems is where that equity schtick works, socialism works best as public services or welfare nets— just like matriarchy is what keeps communities together; it doesn’t build empires.
Roles & norms exist for a reason. And that rings true even if the rigidity of roles intimidates people, not everything is subjective or interchangeable or ambiguous; why? because that is NOT how you got this far.
The declines didn’t start until people got cocky & started challenging and abolishing everything. Yet the new norms that causes supposed “loneliness epidemics” & women’s “burnout”, the very egalitarian-relationships that satisfy not as many as you'd think/ that equitable system that does NOT work by itself (like socialism) THOSE norms don’t get challenged.
Matriarchy is optimized under patriarchy. The “everyone matters”, everyone’s a winner, that very maternal concept of “equity” & “collectivism”, that feelings oriented ideal sounds best on paper until it has to prove it’s worth.
Right up until it runs out of the resources the patriarchal/capitalist/ the production based system made available in the first place. Including the very country capitalism made possible in the first place.
The socialism, like matriarchy, like egalitarianism are patchworks to compensate capitalist/patriarchal oversight. No more, no less.
This is precisely why rich American socialists stay over there with the silver spoon in their mouths instead of going to the socialist countries that’s doing what they want already. They stay their asses right there in America because they like the idea of being rebels simultaneously as patriarchy feeds them.
One redistributes and disseminates resources, the other produces and actually builds something. You don’t have to choose one or the other, socialist programs already exist (Gov. Funded food assist, EBT, child support etc. Tax funded programs, that- in spirit: welfare programs do lean on collective resource pooling, which emulates socialist-esque mechanisms.
[”But when the distribution mechanisms try to become the engine—when a macro-society tries to run purely on “everyone’s a winner,” equity, and feelings-oriented ideals—it begins to consume the stored capital.”]
Getting rid of patriarchy is not the new frontier western people think it is, when all you’ve known your entire privileged lives is patriarchy’s provision. It’s not worth it.
TL;DR Mom has good intentions but can't back it up, Dad gets results but sometimes leaves people behind; there's no reason why those two realities can't work together to make a civilization & not assume Dad has to "step aside" & let mom run the show after you think you're safe enough to not need him anymore. Delusional.
Take your engine out of your car because you think you're far enough down the road to where you don't need it anymore, and see how much further you get to your destination without the component that got your ass on the road in the first place. 🧠Socialism & Equity are luxuries, not essentials. Egalitarianism is at minimum, a patch, not an upgrade. Because for the last time, those concepts do not show up until AFTER the harder work's been done to make a superpower a superpower.
And when your country's in decline, all those latter (maternal in principle) concepts seem to be more prominent.👈👈👈
That's not indicative of them being inherently bad, nor are they inherently necessary given what was done without their prominent involvement or perhaps- keyword: Perhaps: what was accomplished because they were excluded.
Yes! correct on the incentive point 9:24 if people got a fine for quitting they'd stop doing it as much, fact is there's a reward for destroying marriages, mainly women doing it.
Women's emotions fluctuate & some women see dysfunction as an evolutionary advantage but you have to keep in mind that the culture doesn't raise women to see monogamy as stability but a limitation, a ceiling instead of a threshold to a new venue of living.
They're raised with an "autonomy" / I, Me, Myself, Me, Autonomy, Me,: mindset.
That Former Mrs.Ball left likely because she felt bored, complacent, in his shadow probably & leaving was her gaining "agency" or some crap. Perhaps she didn't feel like she had enough part to play in the childrens outcome, perhaps he was a control freak about it.
Otherwise: "agency" is the usual cult dogma that's been drilled into their minds. We don't know her reasons, we're not in her head, but as a general rule this is the fetish dogma western women are brainwashed to obey like slaves, it's the modern rigid norm, but no one's supposed to challenge that norm even though it's hurting women's longterm interests.
Women were told to trade patriarchy for egalitarian socio-political gain & career enslavement; they traded nuclear unit norms for the norms that burn them out, leaves them isolated & lonely because most men will sleep with them but don't take them seriously or respect them because of toxic internet culture that just drives the two further apart either through the media disrespecting men, more gaslights & enabling female resentment of men. Or malecentric echo chambers feeding male resentment of women. People talking past each other, fetishes, distractions etc.
Or the good men they get, they run away for "self-preservation", there's always a term given to them to justify being the weakest link of civilization and frame it like a sovereignty crisis.
Always a victim, hence why they'll never be taken seriously as equals or peers, if you're not held accountable, you're not perceived as an equal or an authority. Apparently not even by womens own women's movements.
Women always have an excuse framed like an existential ultimatum and if you challenge that then you must be a misogynist.🤓🙄
*It's not women's fault that they aren't taught to be wives in the first place. Men have to realize that.* You have to, that's the part that's left out in this "American/Modern Woman" meme. Women are listening to someone's narrative, Even listened to the snake, women either obey norms that help them, or norms that will destroy them. Just because the ideals are coming from Feminism, doesn't mean they're not rigid norms.
And keep in mind this is a basketball wife, not some southern bell from the rural south who was raised to be a real woman and raises the quality of her husband because she is quality.
Aka The lost legend of the "Matriarch".
Let's not confuse the two, there's way too many sub-countries within the one nation of The U.S.A to broadbrush women as a homogenous group.
Is it majority? Arguably. But not all of em.
I will agree with OP that the best American women to marry haven't been born yet, or more likely: Are dead already.
Either pick your meet spots better or just go abroad with tampered expectations, because modernity has infected the entire planet in one way or another. And the quality of men in America aren't exactly 9 out of 10s either.
This is just the era you've been dealt. And it's not all on women, it's mainly on their alleged "movements" that don't get held accountable for what they're telling women, & warping their expectations of life and men. Only then to blame men when the egalitarian, socialist, female-centric ways don't work because they're not and have never been efficient.
That homie made a good observation the bob's acknowledging what he did wrong in the imprisonment chamber as Violet got them out simultaneously, didn't demean him when it easily could've & these days? Likely would've been written to do just that likely uncutting his monologue as a joke or something, especially with Helen reinforcing her own agency in the situation telling Dash not to interrupt him, that little detail is so good vs just sitting there passively & listening until Violet does her thing, everyone in those few seconds had something to do, Violet acted, Bob came full circle on his arc, Dash noticed Volet, Helen reinforced Bob's moment. Everyone had a part.
That man is paying attention to the writings nuance, much appreciated. And agreed. 1:31:15 could barely make him out over the others but he voiced exactly what that scene worked. the guy on the 2nd row on bottom, 2nd left box
2:09 Outside of the film, lets be real::: For Kara to go her own way is to retcon the cousin connection or just retcon her entirely from a universe that has a Superman already, or turn her into a Superman villain, or turn her into either Supermans daughter (Superman: secret identity) & he steps down, depowers with age, goes missing or dies honorably-- which technically is nepo still, but thats a way more organic torch pass, than a miracle survivor cousin which trivializes Kal surviving at all (And I STAND by that because it's 100% facts).
And a daughter being trained by Superman, Batman & WW displays she earns the mantle.
Vs the cousin just being handed the suit being of family ties, aka nepotism.
Or the DCAU route which was unintentionally better because STAS couldn't use Kara Zor-EL legally at the time so they just made her "In Ze" as a work around and that ended up being better anyway.
Kara can NOT go her own way getting by on nepotism. She can NOT go her own way wearing the same costume aesthetic, doing the same thing just with an edgy attitude or that cutesy cali-girl vibe, or the rough girly big sister schtick or the powergirl gimmick. Or whatever Woman of Tomorrow caught itself trying to do.
Just gimmicks, gimmicks, & another stock Kara Zor- El finds herself for the thousandth time filler arc. No substance. No purpose.
She's likeable, but her concept is likeable garbage.
I say this on every video on Kara Bore-El Disparu does that I happen to be on because it's true: The movie was doomed to be cheap, not bad, not the worst but weak knees because that reflects the character.
*To improve Supergirl is to rewrite the character entirely, DC & WB refuse to do that, they instead double-down and so--- this will keep happening.*
Not if the film had the guts, but if DC had the guts. But perhaps there's truth in that, because if the film did go that route, the comics would likely follow. Either way, the pivot has to start somehow.
She will never represent anything feminist when her namesake & stake is because of who she knows. Not what she's done. And the most significant thing she's ever done, twice was sacrifice herself, and it got undone; trivialized. Both times.
When if that was kept intact, she'd be immortalized, because both sacrifices were actually pretty moving, and that's coming from me.
When a manchild spoof of Superman (Prime) has a better character arc than Supergirl, while having a similar tragedy & origin parallel to hers, and far less material given to actually be a character vs a mascot; he's leagues more insufferable yet somehow has a more staple cult presence & nuance (and i use that lightly) than she ever did but she's the one that keeps getting chances, because of relation, not depth or global significance; Kara needs a rework, badly.
It has less to do with feminism & the actress, and everything to do with what you're adapting. Avatar The Last Airbender was plenty feminist, and that didn't stop it from owning.
2:09 There's a difference between scorning an audience that could have supported, or a movie of a character that has a fanbase, but no audience or meaningful significance in the first place. There's a difference.
Can't blame it all on politics or optics, not all of it; the material is just dry af.
If they made an adaptation of Kara's DC Nuclear Winter story, people would love it. Why? Because it's a moving story. I'd sooner recommend people read that than Woman of Tomorrow.
10:28 That's a false equivalence, basically being gaslighted to letting go of your hobbies sooner than you would have organically has nothing to do with this extreme reaction from this guy.
What this guy is doing is a very performative, or maybe he's a hundred percent dead Serious, but this is not an average reaction no more than the ppl overhyping this movie or nay-saying its quality because of box office. (its a solid movie, saw it twice)
This is a guy with a platform and a megaphone, who knows He's going to be listened to, just like the contrasting camp.
So the personal story is kind of mixed 10:28 , "Growing up" aka caving because someone attacked your tastes isnt growing up, its capitulating.
I would say the exact same If one mocked whatever the girls liked at the time that they likely still like now, or maybe they grew into tastes in their adult years that are actually very childish.
Ladies do so plenty with their romantic novels and fic writing, or blogs taking up whole pages shipping characters, self inserts, age play--- grown women btw with jobs.
Adopting Ocs and junk like they're 13yrs old still. Am I going to make a 5000 character article or a 10-20m in on that because someone said something I dont like about a movie? No, im good.
Point being: kinda more of a waste of time than a kid in 6th grade doodling. 👶It's a false equivalence.
Should they grow up because you shamed them out of liking something? and that's coming from me, the accountability guy. But there's a difference between persecution and accountability. What those girls did was persecution. they weren't holding you accountable because they wanted to help or even less likely because they saw untapped potential. Which a lot of women perceive even that young. The question is "motive?"
When you selectively put what you like into a subcategory of immaturity because someone else convinced you not to like what you like, when what they did in the first place>>>>⛔️ was immature⛔️<<<<, or likely intimidated that you had a passion for anything in your life or you had the audacity to openly display it, that was you getting played brotha.
So I get why rich made that example. The correlation is to not be so married to childish things that you become like that other guy. I agree with that.
Yet those girls saw a target and took their shot, if you wanted to recontextualize that or even at minimum, you saw the good in what they did despite how they did it, cope or no cope, that's fine; but from what the data you provided, don't turn it into something It wasn't after the fact just to fit that into this.
Example: someone made fun of that guy's tastes and instead turned him into what we're seeing right now. It depends on who you're dealing with, just mocking someone's interests isn't helping them.
Good on Op For looking at the glass half full vs declaring war on all women because of that experience, but I would take the lesson but without rationalizing it.
But that has less to do with the example you gave, cause its a stretch. because that growing up together sentiment is all fine and good. but if how what they did wouldn't work both ways. Then how they did it was a problem in the first place.
Essentially rationalizing being gaslighted out of ones own interest, that's where he loses me, we're not talking about a fetish that you would be better off without. We're talking about a simple pop culture staple for its era.
Because while this stuff is made for kids, I could say the same thing about avatar the last airbender, does that change the fact that it's a timeless classic for all ages, or that it completely narratively annihilates tv shows and animated projects that are air quotes more "mature" just in terms of writing.
Or the fact that adults wrote and made the content in the first place? so what do we really saying when we use that talking point?
What is it being made for kids have to do with anything?
I know a grown ass woman right now. Running her own business, sits down and watch the berenstain bears Because she likes the music. She likes the characters. She likes the healthy family dynamics. She even likes the setting itself. How relaxing it is, messages. Because technically, that show is made for a lower age bracket. Same with MLP, she binges that joint.
Despite having a nice phone, She will sit in the day room and watch it on full display.
Should I shame her And mock her for liking it as a grown woman, because technically, it isn't mature? despite the fact that i've asked plenty of questions and have stood by through plenty of episodes myself personally and was frankly impressed with what I saw from memes to pacing & themes.
But because of the age bracket and my idea of peers maturing together, because I'm either intimidated by the fact that she's open about it, or I feel some type of way because she has a passion for something and is open about it, or I have to adhere her to how I do things when what she's doing isn't a dysfunctional fetish behavior---- the question becomes, what was my motivation in the first place versus how she would rationalize what I did about her hobby in order to cope with it.
It's technically more normal for a minor to be doodling a fav IP versus violent tendencies because he has no hobbies or a grown ass woman watching children shows aimed for tots and kids.
Strictly: Thats if we wanted to be consistent to that train of logic.
TL;DR that raging guy in the video either has emotional regulation issues or one heckuva character to play for his content and those young ladies back then needed to mind their own business. 👈🗿
it's just such a weird fetish that they don't turn anyone indian or polynesian or spanish or mongolian or Japanese Okinawan or Norwegian (a caucasian? HISSssss); there's so many shades of the human identity ethnically to tap into, but it's always gotta be bland black african american, usually black female.
That specifically is interesting, it's so bizarre. And they do nothing with that background, absolutely nothing warranting the change, because most of these creatives know NOTHING of the ethnic background to use in the first place. But they like the reactions from the swap.
Just a base level DLC skin swap. 100% shallow.
That's not enough to ruin the entire book, but it says a lot about the writer that gimmicks matter more than substance. Could've made Barb a failed P.I or something, and her arc is becoming a realized detective & hacker through trailing Batman.
Something. From what I saw and remember, there was nothing of Barb worth intrigue in that issue worth talking about beyond the unnecessary swap & what says most about the writer: is that was likely the point.
so they do the same thing but he holds it against the dude more, because he's the man.
As opposed to the woman being what, not an adult? Or an Adult 2nd class license+ allowance to be burden without adult consequences (lifetime warranty).
See, this is, exhaustingly: is why so many women/ or at minimum: too many women, act like children with the confidence we will treat them like babies, aka a lower behavioral standard because girls will be girls. Or as the Black community puts it in othering fashion :::: "Females".
Which says what about women?
So condescending and disrespectful. This is how you treat a dependent you tolerate, not an equal. Ideally, you shouldn't even be this dismissive with your own children, in fact.
Yes, women need to vent more than men on average (also depending on personality) as part of the coping mechanism of a situation they perceive as overwhelming, but that's what actual social networks like friends & family are for and women are not the only ones who need to vent.
And even then, LTG is right that some things don't need to be said, but that applies to women too. The Internet is not their marital companion, and yet that's exactly how women treat an intangible, cold, unfeeling, biased, coddling feedback loop. It's unhealthy and for women specifically, it's dangerous because it becomes a dependency.
Same with men regarding porn, hyper-aggressive predation like Doxx or Swatting, troll culture and fetishism. It's a high.
POV: She's a female, but He should know better, because he's a man.
Excuse you, what?
Tl;Dr Can't respect women as peers and then infantilize them as if it's expected that they act like idiots. Nor can you treat them like that & then complain about the quality of women in the pool being poor, when you're part of the problem.
Can't have both.
I like these longer form videos, but I can always count on LTG pull this crap every single time. It's insufferable.
bro goes from Spider-Verse to He-Man, get yo bag brotha.
I didn't think it was possible for anyone to match Bear's theme and the crazy part is I FOUND this trying to find McCrearys themes in the first place. Sometimes the algorithm rewards my suffering.
Daniel Pemberton - The Power Of Grayskull
Sword of Power Guitar: Brian May
edit: after (consistently) hearing the movie was silly & campy already had me motivated to watch it. This beast of a gem sealed the deal. The synth keys are going crazy.
Zack actually moved on, and he's not wrong that the Grift-vengers are suspended comfortably in 2018-2020 but his own reasoning ability did indeed get worse and his ex-wife hate boner makes his coverage of said "birthday party clowns" (ook?) perpetually suspended just like them.
Difference is their content has better production value & they have & show receipts; they are drama kings yes, but they're not lying about the industry as a complex.
⛔Their problem is they often Project that reality on mediocre projects that in fact doesnt fit their narrative. Thats where they get it wrong.
⚠️But Our Boi zack? He moved on, but he didnt evolve. And the reality of the industry didn't just disappear because Zack chooses not to see it or doesn't realize it or chooses to ignore it because he prefers things to be better than they are. Zack will actually still criticize things from the media but if certain people do the exact same thing he does, then its a problem.
Anyone who speaks the contrary is the enemy; If you're the wrong Messenger, You're the enemy.👈
*4 times out of 20, Zacks criticism has applicable weight beyond "dur, you're old (said zack, the spry 19yr old male)"*
(ex. Nerdrotics pearl clutch tweet over Karen and Matt screenshot, which in reality was a hallway walking shot that barely lasted 3 -5 seconds, that was a valid criticism on zacks part)
majority of the time its bro confusing obsession with accountability. clownish. Even worse, Lolcow-ish on his part.
Comics Drama Matters era.🌭
_For the grifters: almost everything new is a threat to be wary of, And if you do happen to catch yourself excited for something, You have to have just enough cyncism & "maybes" to keep anyone from unsubbing_ (just ignore the fact that they On occasion do report things that they like & the subs resonate with it)
And for Zack, everything the grifters report as bad is actually good in La La Land even if it's dog shit and he himself likely wont watch it 3 months from now, a year, if ever again.
🎉If the industry complex says so, then we "enjoy" it & forget about it or dont like it, but its ok when Zack doesnt like something.
🎉If the griftvengers or the wrong ppl says its bad or mid, then we rebel and say its secretly good (self tell) or just a childrens movie ( Not an argument) or they're just old and will die anyway (get therapy). And when they praise something, we simply ignore that, conveniently. Or? Turn even that into a problem.
Very simple formula, bros channel is a dated time capsule in itself.
same insults, same talking points, stuck. what year? current, moving, no evolution, stuck anyway.
so that guy had it backwards but they are not wrong entirely. And while it is unfortunate, it's definitely not not entertaining.
Just remember & take with a grain of salt, that toxic positivity is more potent, because you don't need to blame it on anything, nor need an argument nor a reason, its far easier to bliss and consume. But be wary of extremes on either side of the binary.
There's no good or bad guys, you either have an argument or you don't.
But the modern woman as of 1990 to 2030: as a concept is built too fragile and brittle to be the connective tissue that is a "matriarch", the backbone of the "community" organism and the family.
The the civilizational pillar of an entity that feminism devalues for a CEO fetish, it's like the modern woman was designed to be a hyper-competent weaklink. Cause in theory, modern should mean upgrade, not factory flaw or Bugged Windows Update.
Too many modern women are incapable of being matriarchs because the work as a:
single
or as a mother
or as a wife & mother--
any work that demands too much, is a psychological crisis.
That's incompetence, then they run to the internet to be told by women, men, media, and academia that the issue is everyone else.
Because what she (in the video) is talking about is burnout, but mind you: if he didn't communicate & involve her in the decision making, that would also be undervaluing her opinion, and neglecting her from what gets done.
I won't obfuscate and say trash in the can one time made her go nutty, I'm sure it was recurring enough to build up her frustration; but the problem isn't her being frustrated at all, ever.
Not even 1950s housewives had that plastic smiley face 24/7, women are allowed to be frustrated without it being a "Feminism bad" video essay.
But the sheer lack of retrospect of how small, minute, and petty the situation is-- and her running to social media (women treating the internet like a therapist) to talk about her "amazing" point average husband: That specifically is telling.
That is where she shows her quality as a woman, and ironically: all for the world to see. That's the impulse of a teenage girl.
Single women talk about this too (burnout), so this isn't about marriage, this is about the caliber of woman that girls are cultivated to become:
Which despite feminism & woman worship culture's effort--- what you're curating isn't a leader, but a consumer & part-time laborer who doesn't want to work too hard, and will quit at the drop of a hat.
She even admits that the guy is amazing-- so the amount of work women with her mindset perceive as disproportionate:
they take it as a threat to their agency, they sit in proverbial corner & stew on their brewing self-agitation, feeling powerless and thus seeding resentment when to claim agency is to just open her mouth and speak to him. Especially if he's as allegedly communicative as she describes.
This is the same self-torturing misery Scott Carey put his own dumbass through the entire book of The Incredible Shrinking Man 1956; see most people read it and think "the limits of Masculinity", "Fragility of Masculinity", "Critique of Masculinity". When Scott's fragility, and seeding resentment at a perceived scoreboard imbalance, & externalizing it on everyone around him, pushing people away, burning himself out instead of taking accountability.
Is more accurately representing Post-2000 Modern women's own fragility than anything patriarchal.
And to run to social media to hunt for someone to tell them they're in they're in the right. (Buzzfeed, Reddit etc.)
And all that does is guarantee the quality of woman either stagnates or drops, same goes for men in their echo chambers, and the endless posturing.
Egalitarianism, Feminism, & transactional relationships destroyed the quality of women.
Not just one of those is at fault, none of them are at fault as a single thing (because they all serve a constructive purpose in their own right but it has to be in combination to something else that actually produces something.
*Traditional Nuclear unit,
Patriarchal resources,
mutual anchoring/Co-dependency/maturity/duty),
but the specific combination of all 3 (without accountability btw) is why too many women are so inept at co-habitation.
It's not even their fault, if these women were born 50-60 years ago, but this culture prevailed decades before their birth, this isn't their or men's fault. It's a collective failure.
I've said it before: "Village" skill issue.
Mind you, what he's doing disproportionately that she isn't paying back on doesn't register to her mind. This is the problem with "mankeeping", these labels academia provide women is under the pretense, that a woman's best interest is the actual relationship. That's why when "keeping" is brought up, Lesbians are nowhere near the discussion. The men have to be the scapegoat and beaten into the ground.
There can't ever be a moral for everyone to learn from, someone has to be made an example of.
Her only reality is her immediate inconvenience of being involved in what goes on in their house repeatedly, think about how backwards that is.
If she wasn't the project manager but instead a spectator because he had it down, presumably she would feel left out or have less agency in her own house because he insists on doing everything, then he'd be a control freak.
And you know 100% that's how this would be spun.
She's as involved as her foremothers were, they could handle it (for better & for worse, with less resources, less opportunities; no reddit to cry to, no tiktoks) and despite having every advantage they didn't have--- she's complaining to the world that she has to take out trash or give the man a layout of the children's lunch; the problem is being an adult consecutively and inconveniently.
I 100% do not blame her, you know why?
Zero stamina or endurance, that's not a birthed trait, but a curated outcome.
This is what many of are molded to become, a nerfed human being. Dead weight with scoreboards in their heads; making themselves miserable with paranoia that they're being slighted or de-valued or someone's out to get them. Aka Scott Carey.
A lot of women have valid grievances with their partners, normal orientation or lesbian, but the common thread with "mankeeping" is NOT a man, it's a woman terrorizing herself with her own subjective scoreboard. Aka Scott Carey.
And at worse: incompetence as a partner. Worst? Inability to even be an adult without self-destructing.
I hold her accountable for being a child about this, but I don't blame her for acting on it; the country she lives in won't hold her accountable, social media will likely vindicate her one-sided report or just unleash vitriol that will only reinforce her bias. Either way, she will be validated and learn nothing & continue to be an American Modern Woman.
Which is not a label of "Peak Woman in Human History" but somehow a derogatory term, not in the media of course but in the spaces that matter: the everyday person.
What does a "modern woman" even mean? A Success story or a jumbled mess, or a mascot that academia manipulates with flattery, one mansult at a time.
Because why was she designed to NOT be a functional wife & mother and know how to voice her own exhaustion TO THE MAN she's talking about vs venting to strangers on social media like a disgruntled teenager about the guy behind his back.
Will anyone getting the top comment on her video check her like this? Likely not. And that's why women keep doing this.
This is the model of woman girls are reduced to, less than half of their power, barely a quarter. And yet your nations media has the word "empowerment" in their mouths.
It's always glorifying the career, the slave of wages, the feminist ideal--- and not the mother, the matriarch, the glue that keeps civilization sane. That part won't get empowered, and when it does? A man is often removed from the picture. #ProudSingleMom
Society is trying to kill itself. CEO's, GirlBosses & BadBitches aren't going step up when Civilization collapses and there's no feminism to re-build from the ashes.
Feminism is the luxury movement AFTER the men get civilization to a certain point, women don't act like this before that fact. And the women before that turningpoint, they had less to work with and kept their worlds intact anyway.
The women who get it done, don't complain to social media; they walk away from the problem when there's no solution, they get advice from mama or a mentor or a friend who's managed it; or they communicate to the spouse to resolve the matter or (god forbid) fix the issue in themselves like functional adults.
This is the outcome of egalitarian/ transactional feminist progress in this specific context; the modern woman, career fortified & politically active to her own detriment and destruction: a beautiful castle of glass, crumbling under her own weight, whether married or single, either way; she either cracks and or crumbles.
Blame/ hold responsible the people who built the castle. Hold accountable the movements selling women a dream they can't realistically fulfill.
i'd be the first one to say "it aint that deep, brotha snob", but snob has been out here calling this out. He's not obsessing over these people for no reason, let alone obsessing, he's reporting goons and snakes because most ppl wont. I certainly don't have the time or patience for this bullshit, so kudos to Snob.
Fact is--- Chibi is a hypocrite, and I repeat my previous scorched earth rant--- i can only imagine what this dude finna do when he hit 60 yrs old.
*this is quite the legacy he's curating for himself or has curated (past tense).*
Cause if snob has been calling this out for a decade, think about the implications of that--via how long chibi has been at this bullshit.
*We got to witness the internet & otaku culture ruin this kid's/ this mans mind in real time and he argues "foreign culture" as a shield; and when that doesn't work (cause it's not an argument) then he goes to 'fiction doesn't affect reality' clause, when quite literally to possess a fantasy is to translate or mistranslate actual traits of observable reality, then morph it through trauma & experience and thus fabricate a narrative in creative or multi-dimensional fashion aka media fiction aka FICTION.*
TL;DR Fiction comes from the thing that chibi claims it doesn't effect, but somehow despite it directly/indirectly (not interchangeable btw, not all fantasy is created equal) deriving from reality, despite fiction having objective benefits to many people (which he would cosign in a heartbeat) but at the VERY SAME TIME it does NOT affect reality negatively.*
Convenient isn't it? Age of consent isn't the hill to die on, now he's on his "fiction" talking point, every balls to the wall stance this guy claims to stand for, he always defeats himself.
Because that's not how that works.
Fiction is very much married to reality as the state of wetness is correlated with liquid.
And he's some weeb outsider from the west that likely doesn't know the first thing about Japanese culture. The kicker is, he's creating & enabling more young minds to be just like him, hence "Chibitz" or Cheezits or whatever the fuck he creepily calls these cats. That's really the worst part, not his fall, but he's dragging others with him.
Brotha is quickly approach if not arguably has already crossed the threshold of a lolcow.
And all he had to do was just divorce Anime from the pedestal he put it on, that simple stipulation would've prevented most of this shit he's on, not all, not even the worst of his lore, but it would've lessened most of it.
I pity this guy, if someone made a sped up 60 second montage of his gradual corrosion over the years, it'd be a tragedy in motion.
Could he change? Sure, but he has zero incentive to do so. That's what destroys a lot of young men & women today, social media makes it too easy to surround yourself with enablement. ZERO incentive to change.
"There are ICE agents dragging pregnant women in Minneapolis. They shot a praying pastor with a pepper ball in Chicago. You are apparently living the fantasy world."
Re:
The pastor situation 100%. He asserted it was multiple times he got shot (non-lethal bullets, still excessive).
The disabled woman "Aliya Rahman" scenario is messier.
*Apparently (per her testimony) has TBI and Autism🚨 and was not pregnant.*🚨 On her way to appointment (Hennepin County Traumatic Brain Injury Center.), she froze when ordered to move her car by several agents & leave the vehicle, which she couldn't, needed a cane.
Aliya was genuinely at the wrong place, wrong time, she wasn't obstructing on purpose.
And thus was detained because she didn't comply-- because she froze, because of her condition.
*Where ICE went wrong was the excessive force after she asked for her cane & stated she was disabled, and by omission of evidence & her own testimony, she was not pregnant.
She didn't testify as such, and her legal team did not prove as such. *
She needed a cane to walk, ICE did not provide, they confiscated it. Thats bad enough. Their immediate agenda was getting out of the situation via rapid-carry technique, which dragging is standard practice, it looks bad because of the context.
But military do the exact same to the injured when a shoulder carry is too time consuming in a high stakes situation. Dragging her was their method of choice of rapid-carry technique/extraction, but carrying her would've been more humane than dragging dead weigh. Whether it was faster is up to the beholder, I personally think carrying over the shoulder is faster.
The conduct was excessive, but even if a lie or untruth, if you're being told the detainee is pregnant allegedly & she's verbalizing for a cane. You need to breathe deep & think.
However, also understand how yells & screams can blend into background noise in the field unless it's coming from allies you subconsciously whitelisted---- however if she's repeatedly asking for her cane & you proceed to drag instead of hoist or lift or carry, thats neglect.
And while she was granted hospital care, that was only AFTER she lost consciousness; her overall treatment was unacceptable.
Neither of these sources i cite mention a pregnancy, it's a lie. We shouldn't repeat things without sources or drop it on public forums without looking it up first. Then proceed to receive likes for partial misinformation, confidently wrong.
At worst you can incriminate the fact that her being pregnant was possible & the agents didn't care and kneeled on her anyway; assuming they registered the shouts.
*But in the grand scheme, this is why obstruction & "protesting" should not be conflated as the same thing.
Getting in the way of federal officers then playing victim when actions have consequences have set a dangerous precedent for everyone, including the ICE Agents; to where a woman was accidentally in the way on her way to an appointment but the agents were in bulldog mode because they're used to people being in the goddamn way constantly.
Because everyone wants to be a superhero in lack of actual priorities in their own boring lives that could use that same exact energy.*
When if these feddies were allowed to do the operation and leave, they would literally be gone faster. That's the reality.
This is precisely why people need to stay in their place, keep your damn cars parked where they're supposed to be, stay out the damn street, & just record, picket, say your piece, posture on Blue Sky or Twitter that you're changing the world.
TL;DR _The pregnant woman situation did not involve a pregnant woman but it was still excessive; respectfully, this is why research is important._ 🚨
Minnesota woman ICE pulled from car during arrest files claim against feds: https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/aliya-rahman-ice-arrest-claim/#:~:text=On%20Thursday%2C%20the%20MacArthur%20Justice,damages%20caused%20by%20federal%20employees.
Minnesota woman dragged from car by ICE agents gives testimony in DC:
"I don't agree with everything he says, but he's the sharpest, funniest, most insightful YouTuber out there. He was dead on with the woke stuff years ago, and he's right about the birthday party clowns for the most part. Yeah, he should stop rationalizing his own lateness, but he's right that I would rather have quality than a crap book that's "on time."
And who cares that he's losing subscribers??? The channels that consistently grow are all pandering, crap factories that just hit all the same cynical beats designed to feed the algorithm.
And who cares that he's losing subscribers??? The channels that consistently grow are all pandering, crap factories that just hit all the same cynical beats designed to feed the algorithm. And who cares that he's losing subscribers??? The channels that consistently grow are all pandering, crap factories that just hit all the same cynical beats designed to feed the algorithm."
Mixed bag.
Him losing subs actually has legitimate implications, the main one i'm noticing is his unhealthy obsession with drinker, nerdrotic & the like. Like a bitter ex-girlfriend levels of resentment.
Which is actually playing the algorithm game anyway, controversy & hate videos is sloptubing.
Because he's leaning into an audience that agrees with him simultaneously as people are leaving in greater numbers (hence how ppl are noticing the dip). Thus that "Haha 50yr old manbaby, anti-wokes R stoopid dur" talking point & the comments just echoing what he says Aka he's a pandering crap factory. Just with less effort & production value.
So perhaps he's just a shite youtuber, maybe it's something else.
More importantly, *Zack used to be that rebel, he used to be special, but now he's dancing the fine line of a Lolcow.*
And maybe.....25%/ aka a quarter of his nitpicks are valid. Like Nerdrotic's idiotic tweet about Karen being infront of Matt in a still shot from Daredevil Born Again, stupid, Zack was on point.
_Otherwise, if you're confident in what you say, then how many times do you need to say the same thing? That goes for them and Zack._ (And that's coming from me, the irony isn't lost.)
I'm subbed after 6+ years and STILL subbed just because I'm entertained by his downward spiral. For me it's more noticeable, because I sat on his channel for 3+ years came back and dude is on something different, something slightly off.
If it weren't for his rambling I wouldn't have ever watched drinker or nerdrotic, Im not subbing to them permanently but broadly thats partly why he's losing subs.
I repeat::::::: I actively AVOIDED those guys for years, him raving about them constantly got me curious, im not one of those ppl that just takes your word for it, I scope it out.
And what I heard from them directly DID NOT align with his rhetoric, at least not enough to warrant the vitriol he possesses. He doesn't bring attention to when they praise something, he highlights to his audience only the side of the party clowns he wants to pretend is the only canon event that exists of those people.
And that's not how that works, that's where he's getting this all wrong. ZERO NUANCE.
TL;DR he's like an anti-woke NPC going off an article's title for 30 minutes but for him, he's going off a thumbnail or title for 20minutes and given he's Zack with all his turtles pace verbal eccentricities, a 3 minute statement will indeed be 20- 30 minutes.
It's only now in 2026 that I typed his channel in google to confirm if I'm hallucinating this dude's derailment arc only to find out people 3 years+ prior have noticed the same thing I did. Which is what I didn't want to see.
I couldn't believe it, Reddit posts and everything. Zack used to be that guy--- Underground comics gem, but now he's here, and everyone's asking "what happened?"
Losing subs is very VERY relevant. That rabbit hole is how I found this video. Full circle. This bloat comment of mine is mapping out just one reason he lost subs, just one. Cause he almost lost mine, but I'm curious as to where he veers off to next, he could clean it up over a week and he could bounce back without compromising himself. Imagine the glowup, one of the best character arcs, but he has to want it.
Problem is if he thinks he's the "good guy" & his internal narrative is "Me (Zack) vs Them (Anti Wokes)" then he's really just re-packaging Anti-woke vs Wokes. Othering.
Everyone's got an "Other" that they think it's their job to fight, where Zack goes wrong is not realizing his participation in it or he does, hence the obsession. Creating enemies where none exist, aka purpose, aka content, aka feeding algorithm.
Losing subs is very VERY relevant. That rabbit hole is how I found this video. Full circle.
This bloat comment of mine is mapping out just one reason he lost subs, just one. Cause he almost lost mine, but I'm curious as to where he veers off to next.
So "who cares" is just deflection, it's more about "why?" it's not like he takes 5 year breaks.
So if he's still here and losing subs, there's a reason.
Otherwise regarding the pandering crap factories--- cynical beats, better editing, longer videos for viewer retention, organized playlists, articles/tv clips cited/got receipts, better energy; memes, doesn't take them 20 minutes to get through a damn sentence, bringing up cultural staple moments in entertainment history I never knew existed, they're consistent, i don't agree with everything they say either but they're also not wrong on a lot of beats regarding the cultural corrosion etc. etc. etc.
I don't know everything about these dudes, they're not my internet uncs, their content i turn on and press ESC on when I got better shit to do. So if they're on some crazy shit Zack & only Zack knows about, then he needs to go to Youtube Execs or the authorities; otherwise he needs to calm down.
Because I repeat, if it weren't for ZACK acting like a crazy ex-wife, I wouldn't have ever watched those other guys.
Waaaay more to it than just anti-wokes being cynics and Zack is the valiant Anti Anti-woke here to save us all; Just like there's more to Zack's videos than just him belaboring points, getting lost mid-thought, filibuster and coughing in our damn ears.
Meh, even with Byrne in mind, she was still mediocre. While his run was at minimum "fun" or quirky; She-Hulk's mid in the comics too, some things she did was cringe, like using her strength to muscle people through intimidation or property damage but it played off as cutesy-- dumb, cause the moron's a lawyer, not some street-gal . And yes that was Bryne.
However, the difference is she's likable, but not interesting in the slightest; she's relatable DLC. No different from Kara Bore-El.
Point being- because she's such a safe-mode, bland concept, she's non-offensive, very easy to attach to. So you'd have to put in serious effort to make her insufferable to a normie. But somehow they did it.
All it took was more intersectional feminism when the character was already moderately Feminist as she was in her better runs & it worked, I don't even like She-Hulk but I can acknowledge she works as a feminist character. Because feminism as it's supposed to be is just a woman living her life.
The whole making a statement shit is beyond feminism, because that translates to #1compensatory whining, #2 always justifying oneself, #3always being a burden out of spite because the most empowered always have their hands out but build & contribute absolutely nothing that's valuable to the infrastructure that makes their privileged reality possible. #4 defiance constantly, & the result is they represent progress at the cost of a future-----
That whiney little sister archetype, that isolationist propagandism, that's not feminism. But feminism got absorbed into that shit. So now that's "modern feminism"
Politics turned something objectively good into a gag-reflex inducer. That's what MCU She-Hulk represents, and the writing champions it. It's sad.
You have to try your best to fail an NPC character like Walters lol.
Without getting too deep into it-- It's written too much like a Legend of Korra prequel than an Avatar The Last Airbender sequel.
Not dogshit, yet the overall plot is the weakest link.
It's a good time, just not written all that good.
The more I thought about it, the more it actually trivializes Aang & his team, because the writers wanted to (yet again) make up new shit (Wan, Raava, Vaatu, spirit world being more of a vacation spot populated by pokemon than a primordial extension of the Earth's power that only the best could venture) or pull spin-off concepts from elsewhere instead of expanding what the original series already set up (ex. Koh The Face Stealer).
A lot of contrivances here (hamfisted new concepts aka Korra Syndrome) that just made my brow scrunch, but I did start off hopeful because of how hard it leans into certain beats regarding Aang that I read (especially since my 2024 rewatch of ATLA) wasn't exploited enough in the series despite how well it was executed as it were; the movie begins exactly what I was missing from that specific character beat, very strong start.
Otherwise, the original had more than enough meat to cook with, they didn't need to hardcore OVA this situation in the story department.
Despite the fact that Christopher Yost was on the writing for this (Next Avengers movie writer) this was a mixed bag.
Downside is a lot of the bending here (like in LOK) is treated like Superpowers than an art.
But since the best thing about this movie is the animation-- you're going to get some cool powerscaling feats & really slick fight scenes. (like LOK)
That-- and the fact that the characters are back, technically.
To me personally, they don't come off like the same people that matured vs being caricatures of those characters superficially; which I could tell especially by how Katara & Sokka were written, namely Katara's agency in certain scenes to the broad scheme.
(ex. Sokka is Bolin, not Book 3 onward Sokka)
Aaron Ehasz nor his team were brought on for this (Strike 1 - 2), not just Aaron Ehasz (he's not the best writer to ever live but specifically him and the team that made ATLA work in the first place. It wasn't just him, he was the team leader, but it was a team effort.)
So I went out of my way to lower my expectations, lower than usual; but this was essentially just a modern shonen anime movie.
Meaning: It sets the bar visually, but not exactly the trendsetter in the writing department-- which is what determines whether something is flashy but a forgettable story aka a Dragon Ball Super Movie or instead …. "Avatar The Last Airbender" lol.
Full breakdown another time, watch it for yourselves when able.
Pro tip: 🚨DO NOT compare it to the original series during the first watch, it's not even close, zero point; best way to watch this is to imagine it as a standalone thing. Don't compare lightning in a bottle to a flashlight.🚨 It's got good pacing/ plot driven (tho there's obvious consequences to that that I speak on often) but at the same time, you won't be held hostage; enjoy it. Try to save comparisons until afterwards; cause it's still better than Shyamalalamama's movie & the live-action Netflix show."
2:12 she got his ass here, she's right lmfao. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
If his audience are at minimum half trolls or two thirds of trolls; then the trolls leaving would force him off by necessity thus getting what they want. And if they leave him be offline, he stays off the internet, we've been through this.
Their own collective admission that they are his audience puts the ball in their court to force him off the internet by depriving him of viewers, but they won't leave because they're just as dependent on the high, sense of power, & attention starved as he is, they get off on this.
The difference is: he needs the internet to make money, majority of them don't (not as badly as he does I'd bet) and yet they're still clinging to wings anyway because they get to feel like they serve a greater purpose in the world, they have an Avengers team assembled, a hideout & everything and they have a supervillain that justifies their righteous campaign.
And more importantly, they have someone that makes their lives (good or bad) seem better by default, wings is a sponge for them, which is a worse look.
There's but so many times they can go in circles with the same excuses they used 3 years ago & beyond. I don't recall hearing the guy she's talking to before so I'll assume he's a new cult member, but even these new cats can use the same taglines but so many times dude.
Then he pulls the usual troll coping mechanism "I have (personally) never said that--" even though we all say it when convenient as a scapegoat.
POV: "If we go, you don't have a career", that's a powerplay they've weaponized often. But here? Now the narrative is different because Mrs. Wings is putting the ball in their court and tbh, Wings himself has conceded to wanting to fail if it would get them to leave him alone.
*You as a GROUP have said it buddy boy, don't act brand new.* 😂
_And then other bro pivots to the camp throw/push & first bro got his get out of jail free card and happily jumped to that topic because he knew she was pinning his ass down by their own logic._
Pathetic.
_*He didn't even address what she said then switched the topic, he immediately jumped at the opportunity to segue, because he knew she was right & then made it about the push; you can even hear how relieved he was for that save*_ 2:27
See Wings did push her, he did. She didn't trip, Wings pushed Kelly, it happened.
*But where these guys go wrong is they can't admit their own faults, so they're dishonest. So why are they the arbiters of accountability? This is why they've somehow become more lolcow than their actual cow. They're hypocrites, in so many ways more entertaining than wings.*
So they have ZERO room to talk about integrity when they can't so much as concede something as simple as what she addressed, and did so very calmly. I have to give her that much.
These dudes are just as sad as their target, I stand on that before, I stand on it now. We have the receipts, these guys are a mess. Hamster wheel logic.
Wings genuinely has mental health issues; soooo what's their excuse? And yet that's all they have to offer: excuses.
The "accountability" narrative needs to be dropped, if they'd just admit they know they're pos, it's not about accountability than it is about the sense of power they feel from the fact that Wings can't stop their involvement in his life-- then they wouldn't be hypocrites but this telegraphed, performative 'we're here to help' vibe. They'll always be the other side of wings' coin.
Can't wait til the next lions den in 15-20 years (if wings is still with us) when these mooks have grandkids & still going vigilante on this same exact fat guy. But THEY'RE the heroes right? Delusional indeed & Kelly even called them out on that too, good.
Kelly is in denial on the push, yet in the same exact breath she is 1000% right, even when they want to pretend she spoke martian on the troll viewership point because they both know she's right. Which is WHY they damage controlled & pivoted from her point.
OP's points were strongest towards the end of the video, but disagreed that it's a masterpiece.
A masterpiece is nigh perfection, and HxH is not perfect. The pacing is brutal at times when it doesn't have to be (Greed Island, Chimera Ant Arc), & the 90s anime's pacing is even slower than the 2011 but the 90s anime actually did a lot of things better in just how it wrote the exact same story (way better character writing). And too much goddamn talking when visual storytelling can do the heavier lifting.
The story decisions regarding the Troupe wasn't the best after York New, Chrollo has been shelved waaaaaay too damn long, & we're in yet another arc (Succession) that has nothing to do with him or the Troupe in premise as a focus. Meanwhile they're off jerking around somewhere.
But HxH is still good anyway, despite it's issues, why? Characters & it's INITIAL story structure bought it enough good will to where later red flags could be afforded. MHA jacked up it's own theme out the gate with contrivances, nepotism, plot armor, dysfunctiona/unhealthy overtones & hypocrisy.
Otherwise, I personally think The Netero & Meruem fight could've been less repetitive and had better choreography but what we got by the shows standards of power scaling, is still pretty dope. Way better than most My Hero fights which is 90% flashbacks & looking at people watching the fight than actual fighting. Meruem actually communicated a strategy while seemingly getting smacked around, even Gungi playing a visual factor into the matter; the talking served a purpose because how fast everything was happening, you'd need exposition just to keep up.
So that much, was pretty good.
Overall, HxH simply what 90% of shonen are not: which is "competent", which means it does the bare minimum, and the bare minimum doesn't mean it's a masterpiece.
That says less about it being a masterpiece, than it says about shonen as medium being a dogshit genre & the bare minimum in comparison seems like a masterpiece.
That says more about the genre, than the show itself.
Watch the first 3-6 episodes of MHA, realize Teen Titans 2003 is better in every way in less episodes (2 minimum) & one movie. Then watch HxH. Then watch Avatar the last Airbender, actual peak.
Gon's quality as a main character? Infinitely superior to Tearsdoriya, leagues more depth & range without the coddling, handholding, being gatekept in that damn school, the one time he went independent he was POLICED right back to being the same caricature, and that babying "you can do it", "do your best", "I'll save everyone" Nick Jr. bullshit. Absolute joke.
Gon is a good kid with a limit, he'll help you in neutral, he'll give you a chance when you push it, he'll threaten you if you get in his way, he'll hurt you when you do get in his way and if you body one of his own, he will kill you. Crying inner child or not, he got two hands for both you & the child crying in your soul or whateverthefuck.
That's an actual person with realistic boundaries, vs some mascot kid who acts more like an emotional support animal than representing an actual person. CHRIST himself is more three dimensional than Deku is, that's how unrealistic & boring izuku the snowflake is.
I finished MHA before I even took HxH seriously (after years of scoffing at it), Gon is an actual main character, a severe breath of fresh air; and when others share the spotlight, it's not spread thin between 20 fucking characters, and one of the characters that got the spotlight was the antagonist Ant King.
Deku is a MC figurehead, brutally and thats being generous.
Deku's concept works better than the execution, Gon's concept as an archetype works with his execution because he's not an ideal, nor ideal as a person. He's written like a flawed human being who's allowed by the narrative to taint his ledger / & corrupt his image vs being protected from having to make tough decisions, thus preserving the character to be the exact same person the entire show, aka a caricature. And just having an edgier design or costume isn't character development.
All in all, HxH ain't no masterpiece; it's got plot armor, it's got too much exposition out the ass at times, contrivances, etc. but most of it can be afforded but it is written worth a damn. So even despite it's problems, for a shonen, it's still competent.
As Macrocreeps will communicate inadvertently through their misanthropic/misogynist propaganda cosplaying as a hobby: women are goddesses apparently, allegedly.
Can do no wrong, above us greasy mere mortals known as men that are here to serve. According to society, women's shit don't stink.
Women are held accountable legally, but in public discourse, rarely. Politically? Academically? Culturally? Gets even messier.
"Equality" is a red herring, if you're not held accountable, you're coddled. A coddled is a liability, not an equality. But equality is fetishized more than accountability & merit when accountability equally is being an equal.
Paradoxically the west wants & advocates what is pushes away.
As a society, we buy into an unspoken and pervasive bias in favor of women: as the fairer sex, they must be inherently more righteous and loving than men. Which is why things get feminized & Ai will admit that the academic sphere adheres to female lens approaches as the masculine are inversely perceived as negative.
Yet we are all human, and capable of being slaves to base passions. Just as men’s, women’s passions can manifest in destructive and ugly ways.
Every toxic manifestation men can do women can do, this is also why toxic masculinity is also a gaslight. Socialized behavior of men doesn't explain why women do it to, so is it a boys are taught to be toxic?
Or is academia trying to make what is a neutral human fault a male problem? Thus giving women yet another false sense of security?
Well this isn't a modern phenomena, bias toward women is in our DNA, they bear the babies. So we associate women with children and babies, it's why we treat women with the same tolerance & lack of accountability we spare for children (culturally & socially), humans don't treat women like children consciously but the double standard is infantilizing.
The western worlds "First woman to (do something a man did already)" fetish does the same infantilism effect. Notice how those headlines rarely share what exactly she did or earned that was so special, you usually have to read the article to find out what she did or if she was useful vs the primary importance being fetishizing her sex in the position. What she actually accomplished, if anything, beyond the position was irrelevant to the headline. And girls are taught to think that treatment of them is normal, a constant inferiority complex.
And others claim women being more emotionally attuned means they can't make sound rational decisions, all lies.
The problem is society has progressed but it hasn't "advanced", this is why standards get lowered, gender roles & norms get uprooted. It's not advancement, the rigidity is what made the empire you suckle off of. Where do you think you can go by getting rid of what got you here in the first place?
Not every tradition is worth upholding (ex. Aztec human sacrifice ) but some traditions you can objectively attribute to prosperity (ex. Nuclear family but this time + upgraded with some egalitarian values vs destroying the trad unit and replacing it with egalitarianism, which is not sustainable)
progression just means you moved in a direction, it doesn't mean it's the right direction.
Advancement is to go in a better vector than previously, to advance is to evolve.
Civilization hasn't evolved, we infantilize women then wonder why some women act weird, or get burnt out when they have no support system because feminism taught them hyper-independence was strength which is more like toxic masculinity than what we're told is toxic masculinity.
we wonder where Karens come from, why young Women are so entitled yet so useless in a utility sense of a relationship. And anything that requires too much of them is the relationship failing them or men being a burden, when she is the weak link that can't perform without reward.
Because raising a child is an asymmetrical duty, a child can't reciprocate. If you're caving inward because you have a scoreboard & according to you, your partner isn't 50/50 on everything. You're not built for cohabitation happiness.
Your era groomed you to be alone forever.
We're raising them to be passive bystanders in their own lives and encourage them to be bosses and produce absolutely nothing.
The same energy we exert to keep men in check we need to exercise it to keep women in check as well.
Because infantilizing women ,giving them trophies for being "the first women to-" [insert thing a man has already done] is just treating women like actual children. Everytime I bring it up to Ai, the Ai concedes every single time. Not because I'm looking for a cosign, I want to be wrong, but this objectively is condescending & women get pounded with this constantly.
Their accomplishments matter less than what are in a position, a token, which is fetishization. Figurehead energy.
They're winners for playing, not actually doing anything worthy of praise. The fact that Valentina Tereshkova contributed to aerosol layer studies within the atmosphere with her observations, atmospheric composition took strides because she paid attention during her space mission but that matters less than her being the first woman in space-- she wasn't the first to a solo space mission, she wasn't the first person in space & she was a woman. She was the first woman in space after men did it first; thus technically proved it was safe for women to do it too whenever one would do it.
And the "first women to" implies we're impressed that she did the bare minimum men did, which implies a contrary attitude that she couldn't do it? And if it isn't that deep, why is that constantly the narrative as if we're still in the 1930s?
When will women doing anything not be worth news, when they're not the first to do it in the first place.
It makes women like Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer Doudna's feats look minute despite them being advancers of their field, because the default is women are praised every other week for doing essentially nothing but joining an activity. You rob the exceptional women the shine they deserve & by proxy you make a woman's achievement in the eyes of men look like they never earn it.
The bias isn't the entire issue. It's the hypocrisy, by trying to empower women, you make empowerment meaningless.
Recognizing this doesn’t negate the plight women have endured in a historically male-dominated world, but it being male dominated is why we're not in caves. We can't use "historical" as an excuse forever, it's why you'll remain stuck in suspension.
You want progress while keep the past in your pocket as emotional black mail.
It simply suggests women hold no monopoly on virtue as a bizarre form of social karma.
Women’s ascendance past centuries-old barriers is remarkable and praiseworthy, but it's not impressive when the women who actually took the risk are in rest & their more privileged successor are trying to hijack their struggle as their own when there's less risk. But they talk as if they're one opinion from assassination.
Almost all the men I know look with pride and amazement at the mothers and daughters in their lives, and understand the “Me Too” movement is a long-overdue reckoning for bad men. But why must success for one sex automatically include derision for the other?
The laudable, original objective of the feminist movement urging us to better our traditional manhood has warped into an assault on everything masculine. It strips away empathy for boys, who must navigate a world that assumes the worst of them because they're not woman enough, which falsely presumes womanhood or more women is the answer society needs, the numbers show that is not the case. You need men, the world is male dominated because men have the drive to carry the world, it's why men get blamed for everything.
You blame the authority, not the help. Women aren't held accountable but men are blamed (even if it's women's fault) because male-driven systems is why you have advanced society.
A womans word alone can send you to jail and if she lied well oh well, you lost years of your life and her identity will be protected.
Remember, women are oppressed in first world countries.
And don't you dare tell a woman she looks nice today that's considered violence.
See we drive men and women apart, we don't challenge articles that are doing nothing but inflating the problem, then wonder why society is going down the crapper.
It's a real mystery.
Ostracizing Masculinity
Men kill themselves higher rate than women. They also make up the vast majority of combat deaths; more than 97 percent of American military fatalities in Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom were men.
And nobody cares because men suffering is beneath our notice, it's normalized into the culture. So normalized there's a fetish that specializes in emasculating & dehumanizing men to the furthest extent possible as an inferior derivative of the human species and painting women as omnipotent & superior, even actual goddesses.
(overcompensating much?)
Male suffering is all part of the plan baby, it's how you bring a country down to it's knees. Better believe it.
And if it's coincidence, that's even worse.
The quick ascendence of this concept to cultural gospel is reflected by how common the phrase has become.
Although The New York Times has since removed its calculator for word frequency in its coverage, screenshots posted to Twitter suggest the term “toxic masculinity” was basically nonexistent in the media until recently. Though a man did coin the term in the 80s
After that, its prevalence appears on the graph as a slope verging on vertical.
The same is true for related terms like “patriarchy” and “male privilege.” A Google search for the term “toxic masculinity” yields more than 7.5 million results.
Brokenness of Boyhood, listen to that language, the insinuation of inherit defection. I can just taste the venom through my screen. Holy shit.
Imagine it: "The Brokeness of Girlhood"
Now mind you, the inherent toxicity of women manipulating people, their propensity to be passive aggressive, jealous, vindictive, violent, slapping people, & turn people against each other, plot murders, warp a situation by feigning weakness or using tears to turn a situation- which actually makes them smarter predators & leagues more dangerous than men.
Which is why female PDF's I'd argue are not minorities, you just don't catch them.
Feigning weakness are things girls learn subliminally as children to both navigate males & also to just influence the behavior of their parents and then authorities to the best of one's ability. It's a survival technique to navigate communities & even please people. It's women can be convincingly two faced.
A woman manipulating someone isn't inherently malicious, sometimes women use it for for someone's benefit even at her own expense. They did it at work, as mothers, etc.
It even happens in classrooms or parties. Women are not stupid and it's a natural instinct of women , but it's actually very dangerous.
The entire point of GONE GIRL is to show how effective a woman can be if she really wanted to mess someone up without putting her hands on anyone.
See the problem is we've made it so "toxicity" is only defined by what men normally do wrong, not by women's standards too.
So that way when it's time for women to take accountability, it's never time, because there's always an excuse or a phantom patriarchy to blame.
The “toxic masculinity” narrative deepened further in 2019, when the American Psychological Association, for the first time in its history, developed official guidelines for working with men and boys. The document is discouraging, calling for recognition of “the impact of power, privilege, and sexism on the development of boys and men” and casting what it considers “traditional” male behavior as inherently problematic.
When men showing emotions has always been a thing, the problem is they don't express them like women, & we attribute that to negative affects later in life & not the fact that society actively neglects boys & men.
That's the point. That's how you destroy what makes a Country a threat. Masculinity.
North Korea is not shaking in their boots because we have Sensitivity Classes or because THE VIEW has an opinion, hell, this is only an argument if pretend women never start fights, or are stoic, repressed their emotions or cause trouble.
I repeat, men being stoic is toxic, Ai even makes this mistake. But women are enabled to be stoic, to be independent, to do everything, to have everything. Why is toxic masculinity only a good thing when women are told that's the modern woman?
When people say if women ruled the world-
Harnessing electricity would've been postponed, don't kid yourselves. We might be a more cultured world but a less evolved one, civilization wouldn't be anywhere near the internet or sewer systems.
With women on top, it'd likely be more fair, and that's a big if. But our advancement ?Technology? Say bye bye to your vibrators kiddos.
All in all, America is very effeminate, that's partly why it's failing. Partly, more nuanced marriages isn't why American is collapsing, feeling they had to destroy masculinity to install egalitarianism was the mistake.
Where Is the Empathy For Men?
Ignored, Americans have an inclusive, sensitive, tolerant society (Gemini A.I will tell you this bullshit)-- Unless Men or White people are involved in the conversation.
It’s debated whether certain masculine behaviors are born of dubious socialization or are the function of natural, hormone-driven biological traits. Meanwhile, many of the people shouting about toxic men also inexplicably claim there are no differences between the sexes.
Which one is it?
The idea that men can only redeem their fundamental brokenness by acting more like women is not limited to the gated community of elite academia. It permeates the nation’s mainstream reading lists, even therapy's rigid feminized models of care.
Just one example from late 2019 was the book “For the Love of Men” by Liz Plank. On the very first page, we are told toxic masculinity is more dangerous than nuclear war, followed by chapter after chapter of dodgy research in which toxic masculinity is essentially defined as any behavior Plank doesn’t like.
there's legitimate criticisms on women's part, men do commit majority of violent crimes but they also build the cities in full, bridges, die doing it too- are men going to get articles on mass press that fact ? No.
Men are the majority of violent crime perps by 80%+, and 80%+ of men are not violent criminals & sexual violators. In fact they're more so 85-90%+ the reason why your national power grids are still online. Wil feminism admit that while complaining about child labor wage gaps? Nope. Will Academia give men their due respect for doing what women (in all fairness) choose not to help contribute to because they reasonably don't want to? Which is fine, but don't present this specific "toxic masculinity" bullshit doesn't apply to women, then frame the term as if it's male issue when it's not.
Then IGNORE the burdens men shoulder almost exclusively over 80/% while women cruise on their backs and girls aren't encouraged to be self-aware that they are indeed, not the main characters, not perfect, not the solution to everyone's social contentions but part of the solution.
The narrative is brutally, intentionally backwards. How do i know it's on purpose? Who the fuck lies like this on accident, when they're supposed to be the "experts".
#MenAreTrash looks better on a T-Shirt, meanwhile they're out right now building your goddam malls
First world societies need masculinity when matriarchy fails civilization and then in peacetime men need to closely emulate or turn into women or else they're problematic.
When patriarchy is the foundation & matriarchy fits under it, the two (like capitialism & socialism), like meritocracy & equity, like men and women. The two can exist together but cannot, YOU CAN NOT remove the masculine after it's done doing the hard labor, move in the feminine as the upgrade then expect the feminine to be both the feminine & Neo masculine.
Then when things eventually collapse on the feminine watch, women are blamed when they can't be men. When the average women isn't asking for men to go away, women simply want a seat at the table & a voice to speak, and a toolbox to contribute.
Masculinity doesn't have to go away or be redefined in the image of women for that to happen.
That's exactly how it does and doesn't work.
Where is the empathy for men? The question doesn’t require us to disregard women’s historical suffering, but it also warrants that women today are objeectively not the women from 1758.
It's okay to admit women have unequivocally better now, challenges still exist, but women in first world countries are not victims. We can't use "historically" as a shield to get what we want by force, that's being a WEAK-LINK.
Rather, history simply acknowledges that in modernity most men are neither predators nor abusers, and asks the same empathy and sympathy for men that our feminist society demands for women.
"Modern" doesn't have to mean regression, failure, decline, & "mistake" but that's exactly what happened.
"-and asks the same empathy and sympathy for men that our feminist society demands for women."
keywords: "asks" vs "demands"
So we're asking people to exercise equality between men and women......fancy that. Which begs the question, if equality is what we're begging for, what is it people have been dealing with if not a gyno-egalitarianism state? Which is becoming more matriarchal in sensibility despite how many men are still in power. You'd be surprised how many elites & their cabals dabble in goddess worship, matriarchy, what do you think the Statue of Liberty is? A Sun Goddess, that's not Christian. That's paganism.
Better ask somebody.
Anyways, equality is what our foremother's wanted in the first place but their daughters inherited a hybrid of privilege and Platinum First Class Protected Status, damn near ranking above the elders and children.
We're asking Feminist society to do it's fucking job like the good old days, lmfao.
