i was thinking last night about how sad it is that the main content out there for our young men to consume is basically reactionary dumbasses interviewing celebs or athletes or whatever. i was thinking it would be cool if a podcast existed that was just like regular dudes and getting their thoughts on masculinity, the family, relationships etc
the types of topics young men might be interested in and look to their fathers for guidance but not everyone has that, or some fathers are shitheads
is there anything like that out there? and if not would anyone be interested in recording some interviews and seeing if its any good?
i was thinking about trying to come up with like 3-4 questions to start as a template to ask everyone then following the conversation and seeing where it goes from there
i also just had a high abv beer and have adhd so i might never follow up on this lol
"gets girls" Nah don't say that, this is the sort of shit that makes women feel uncomfortable on Hexbear.
(Edit: I also think that a podcast for already not misogynist people is a good idea. That's just a bad form for a pipeline to the left.)
Asking for a podcast which is aimed towards helping men understand their social situation and how to be good people (and how that is the real trick to building companionship or even short term relationships) is good and a good idea. I think it should be treated as a "reeducation" but without framing it that way (just an advertising tactic). This small tactical shift will make it a totally different idea which must be implemented at some other juncture in people's lives (starting super early, in combination with feminist theories against misogyny, etc).
If the simple "Joe Rogan for leftists" idea is followed it just won't be effective in the patriarchal society we have built. Misogynists (and here I include the average person in a society built on misogyny, not just outright hate spewing bastards) aren't looking to resolve issues, but find that one trick to "get girls", while seeing them as the objects of their desires. One podcast episode will never hook these people to listen to more: the strategy must begin elsewhere (like shaming or women denying them their objectification) so that reflection is required. But that reflection is most successful when they are confronted directly.
If you think the strategy will work I'd be curious of the mechanism. I just find it strategically and tactically a non-starter to solve any of our issues of patriarchy and misogyny as anything except a tool for reeducation
I'm gonna be direct with you here, no amount of personal or public shaming has ever gotten me to change any view I've ever had; definitely not from strangers on the internet. It usually just makes me see whoever is trying to shame me as a personal enemy, not somebody to suck up to. The only time I've ever actually changed my opinion on anything (with regards to fundamental values & not simple "facts about the world") is when they either directly conflicted with me achieving my own goals, or it resulted in somebody I care about getting hurt & I felt bad about that.
I don't think that shaming men is going to result in any kind of general shift in behavior, especially since that's kind of been the default way of engaging with men from a Feminist position generally for as long as it's been a thing. You have to highlight either how it actively impedes them from achieving what they want, or harms people they actually care about.
I never said online, and in fact had in mind direct confrontation from people physically near you. I'm thinking here of a woman calling a misogynist a pig. But I also think that "shaming" as a tactic hasn't succeeded because of the material conditions of men in society, of course. So the ones who are salvageable will change after some shaming (and I will admit to being raised misogynistically and leaving that behind after being confronted by people, so I'm a direct example), and those who aren't won't be saved. The big shift people have imagined +and blame feminism for not achieving) is entirely because of the patriarchal society and it's structures reinforcing misogyny.
In considering material conditions, there is what one is able to do as a consequence of the position that they hold in relation to others; and there is what one needs to do in order to secure their survival & posterity. If it is always a conflict between the personal agency of women & the ability of men to secure their livelihoods, then most men are always going to at some level resent that agency, or the choices made with it. Hence, the drive to create a Patriarchal society.
Dissolving that drive is a challenge of reconciling the ability of men to meet their material needs, with the freedom & agency of women.
Edit: I should clarify that this is meant to engage with the question of how to stop men being personally misogynistic, not how to empower women to combat it. These are two different questions, with different answers, although the latter is probably more important historically.
What is this Christian Evangelical/Calvinist nonsense?
Who is the revolutionary subject in the class struggle between men and women? My point is this: the people who can see oppression of women and want to change it can be "saved" in the sense that they can be non-misogynyst and work towards the Liberation of women. The others are not subjects to be worked with on this front, and due to their material conditions won't be until we can shift those conditions.
This is all in response to the idea of a leftist pipeline through a "leftist Joe Rogan" or something of the sort. My point is that there is nobody who is important to work with on the topic who will be moved at all by such a thing. It's a tactic which mismatches with the target group. The people for whom a pipeline is needed won't react to it (because of material conditions at the moment) so the focus should be on their conditions. The people who would react to that pipeline wouldn't have any interest in it, because they are already sympathetic.
It might help some very unique cases, but it's not relevant to any bigger movement.
Can you please explain what you mean by this?
Because I'm really sorry but I think this view is incorrect and harmful.
Using the number of an individual's companions and sexual encounters as a means of assessing their moral character (logical implication of telling people that "being good is the real trick to building companionship and even short term relationships") is highly unreliable.
I could go on but lets see what you have to say first.
I think I'm saying the opposite of that: there's no way to build relationships without learning to be a good person and understanding your social situation. It's not some guarantee of anything, and you don't measure goodness backwards by companions. Being good is just 1 of the prerequisites to having happy companionships. Sorry if it sounds like I'm flipping cause/effect or the measurability here; I'm not.
There are of course people who desire to have a relationship with misogynists (to some extent, otherwise a lot of famous men would never have had children), but the best solution to being happy and having happy companions is being a good person (among other things, because of course it's complex with desires/attraction/social expectations). That's my point.
Edit: removed 'ticket' as a phrase because it is not useful to my point and the conversation to adopt the terms of the 'target group ' when their position is the problem. Also I guess my point originally was to emphasize that men frustrated with a lack of companionship/relationships and searching for "answers" are almost definitely in need of learning to be a good person first. And you can't build a pipeline to "good person status" out of podcasts discussing 'getting girls'.
There are definitely people who want relationships, aren't shitty, and are lacking companionship. These people don't need that sort of podcast, but something else to help with e.g. social experiences or relating to others. This is some good stuff that should be made. But the original post I replied to was insinuating it as a leftist pipeline. That's not what a podcast focussed on already good people would be.
Yeah I agree too, like "learning to be a good person" as in making sure you're not going to be abusive/violent/manipulative to your partner? I think everyone should learn this regardless of whether they are in a relationship or not tbh.
Also just not objectifying your partner but seeing them as fully human. The amount of men that lack this skill is baffling, but it's a direct consequence of a patriarchal society (here referring to the broad phenomenon, not all specific individuals)
Ok no worries yeah I completely agree with your overall point. That men should be taught not to be misogynists before they have relationships. If successful this will prevent a whole lot of abuse and suffering.
Awful people build relationships and win friends and all that all the time. Its just that the sort of relationships that result from those are either bad for the people involved or everyone else.
The world is a sick place and you are right that things should not be this way. This is why its important to be good and support anti-imperialist struggle, as you said.
Yes reeducation is it that's exactly the point
My post wasn't aimed at you, comrade. I think asking for resources as a comrade to improve socializing as a man is great! (I see your pronouns, from your OP I'm assuming you identify as a man, please let me know if I'm wrong and I'll change immediately)
I unfortunately think there are no such resources that I've found. I think reading feminist theory and attempting to "look in the mirror" simultaneously is a difficult, rigorous, but very fruitful exercise with similar results. But that's not what you're searching for, and I get that.
I'd love to have a wholesome "here's what good dad's should be like" podcast to listen to. Or some more totally anti-misogynistic chats between guys talking about life generally. I was hoping to find it in your thread too!