My workplace has a ton of these "Rise & Grind™️©️®️" Sigma and Ligma mindset books all over the place. I read them from time to time to gaze into the dreaded and loathsome Manosphere and understand my enemy.
The core of these books is a sort of bastardized self-actualization. I genuinely don't think becoming accountable to set of values and being active member in one's own life is a bad thing; in fact I think if they left it at that a lot of guys would be better for it. However, I find it to be uniquely corrupted by neoliberalism and capitalism, in that it twists and warps manhood into this ideal that demands the domination of everything and everyone around. It turns manhood into a zero-sum game.
A lot of these books blogs websites do offer somewhat meaningful mental frameworks for “achievement” but I'm always questioned as to what end. much of it is a false myth of manhood and recapturing a masculinity that never existed which I feel uniquely disappoints men. Patriarchy leaves men particularly vulnerable to these sorts of traps and snares when they are feeling down and out.
I do think it's good to strive and do your best, but that should never EVER come at the cost of someone else doing the same. If anything you should be helping others become their best too, so you two can be your best together and shine even brighter. I hate how the modern world has made being a dude about just being a dick with a bunch of stuff rather than being a good person. Discipline, steadfast commitment, pushing through failure, all that sort of stuff is great and good but not if it's just implemented to get a new shiny bauble or whatever. Capitalism really does hinder men's ability to live up their supposed values and virtues. We can’t be the mean we want to be with under capitalism, we can’t be the men we actually should be as along as capitalism is rules over us
Being a great man should be defined by your ability actually live out manly virtues, not these fast food Mc-ideals of debasing yourself for some coin. A good dude is more than his ability to dominate.
I don't know what my larger point is, but I'm just typing this at work cause they got me working on a Sunday and all these dumb books are lying around the "leadership" library. It's just so fuckin' corny.
I read bell hooks’ The Will to Change
Hell yeah me too. It was the most impactful read of 2021 for me. Great stuff cover to cover.
1.) I like your username
The lack of relationship skills among men in the US (where I live) is very noticeable and pretty sad, especially given how so many men complain about loneliness (both in terms of dating, and having no friends).
Yeah! Men I think are so poorly socialized and I really think the stupid zero-sum mentality negatively impacts our ability to connect with each other on even the most basic levels. I know not everyone needs to be your bestest most deepest friends, but we taught to approach everything as a contest of wills.
I think that the big issue here, and the fundamental problem that I often have with this line of thinking; that most dudes just need to "do better", is that most of what you're talking about in terms of pursuing self-actualization, self-efficacy, and self-worth (Also note, these are all basically framed as matters of Personal Responsibility even by the language used to name them 👀 ).
The problem is that most of those things are, as a result of the necessities of the Capitalist social-economic order, hard-locked behind a baseline of economic security & social connection that an increasing amount of men outright can't meet; and may well never be able to meet under the current social order. It is also a basic matter of fact (though of course by no means a good one) that as long as Capitalism remains the dominant economic order of the day, then there is no possible way to "Get Ahead" of your current position in society that doesn't involve either passively, or actively depriving others of their own livelihoods. Especially in a circumstance of general economic contraction, which hey look we've been in for the last 20 years almost now.
The reality of that is understood when we talk about Imperialism, or racialized & gendered economic disparity within the Imperial core, but we don't really consider it under the present context at all. I suspect that this is because it is assumed (and, admittedly, not completely without warrant) that anyone failing now deserves it. 👀
IMO it's kind of a problem with the modern left that they want dudes to abandon any semblance of the idea that society should exist to help people meet their needs, and especially their social needs. I think that they do this because "Manoshphere" types have actually successfully gotten out ahead of them on this issue; and have correctly assessed that if we want to "Save Western Civilization" (I.E. retain Capitalism as a basic economic structure) this would require rollback on many if not most of the social gains made by, mainly Women & LGBT groups, but also probably eventually People of Color.
So, because nobody can possibly entertain the notion that we would ever actually be able to overthrow Capitalism in the Imperial Core, and thus any attempt to genuinely alleviate the social isolation experienced by "Failing Men" could only serve to entrench the oppression of Women & LGBT people. The Left Position has become that we need to cultivate a sense of reflexive & internalized self-denial in men who cannot successfully embody the role of a Patriarch. I think this is a losing strategy though, because rather than redirecting their (IMO legitimately held) grievances against the actual structure which is making it impossible for them to live meaningful lives, the goal is to diffuse that discontent entirely.
It's also a losing strategy because it's obviously going to ultimately end up being rejected by any man for whom it is a relevant issue to their personal social lives. Because the stated intent is to get them to be okay with their own personal social & material ruination. It's doing the Democrat thing from the 90's about "Entitled Rednecks in Flyover Country Hate our Economic Reforms", but for any man at the periphery of social inclusion. And just like that problem it's going to foment reactionary backlash, because there's no proposed positive solution to the problem.
but is that even a solution? what relief does someone dealing with these problems get from that
none! i think gender abolition would help a bunch of these guys but I haven't found a way to do that without ruining a bunch of things trans people have spent years fighting for.
https://libcom.org/article/gender-accelerationist-manifesto
I read the whole article and while I still don't think gender abolition will help me in particular there were some ideas in the essay that got the cogwheels in my brain turning. I wrote a great deal more in the other comment thread.
I think one of the issues I have bringing this up with men is that they tend to put up a wall when it comes to that final leap of accepting that gender is fake. Most (lib/left) women tend to kinda at least get on board with the idea of disinvesting from gender and I think that's due to the general awareness of their own oppression.
In order to beat patriarchy we need a mass movement of not just queer people and not just 'allies' but a mass line of everyone, because gender is fake for everyone and it oppresses everyone. If only queer people are talking about this stuff and doing the organizing around it, as we have been for decades, it won't get off the ground. Masc investment in patriarchal norms seems to be the biggest block, and whenever I bring it up with men they just kinda shut down and don't wanna talk about it. But they have no issues blaming women for their problems and get tons of engagement when that's the spin on the topic.
I think one of the issues I have bringing this up with men is that they tend to put up a wall when it comes to that final leap of accepting that gender is fake.
Gender is fake in the same way that money, culture, and national borders are fake. You can't possibly strictly reduce them down to purely naturalistic phenomenon, but they also couldn't possibly exist without a natural & material world to make reference to. Also while they absolutely do change in exactly what they mean, and how they function over time, they're still extremely important & have very real consequences to people in the times & places where they exist. You can't just act like they aren't real at all, and expect to not face consequences for doing so.
They're also all deeply inextricable to the fabric of Class Society, and can only really begin to be challenged with the abolition of economic classes.
That's my position on things.
Haven't finished it yet but there's already some really good bits:
Gender was defined by the intrigues of court or the necessities of toil in the fields or in the cities. But, with capitalism, we find it more and more tied to wage labor and marriage transformed with it. The male part of reproductive labor was increasingly to labor for a capitalistic boss and the female part to support his wage labor from home. This effect on the material base of gender caused it to transform, both in how the classes worked and in the characteristics of the superstructure.
necessities of toil in the fields
This is especially apparent in Chinese where man 男 is the character for field 田 over the character for strength 力 basically meaning "field worker"
Also of interest is the section of how men and women are socialized. The problem I have always had with this isn't that it's not true, but that it's only a generalization and not a set of solid rules as to how they are expected to behave. What is masculine and feminine varies a great deal and versions expected of society still vary considerably. How do these variations fit into Marxism?
...and the next paragraph addresses it :picard:
Continuing reading
By objecting to my gender, you are objecting to that which is inherently me.
This is how I generally feel too. I'm curious to see how the article deals with it.
To do away with gender, so to must go capitalism, race, neuronormativity, and the state.
Solid agree here. You can't abolish this system without abolishing the others.
Looks like we've gotten to the revolution and future plans section of the article
Dictatorship of the Queer
This could be very easily misinterpreted just as Dictatorship of the Proletariat is. Curious to see where they go with it.
This means creating queer organizations and institutions. Counterpowers to the dominant patriarchal class system. These allow for us to provide people with what they need for transition, including providing HRT drugs, supporting victims of sexual assault, empowering women outside of the system, and ultimately providing spaces to be different, to escape the domination of gender.
Although it's only online, I feel that Hexbear provides a space to be different and escape the domination of gender. Thanks to comrades like @TransComrade69 and many more for making that possible :flag-gay-pride:
It is not much more than an attempt at clarifying my own thoughts on the matter, tbh.
It is not much more than an attempt at clarifying my own thoughts on the matter, tbh.
You have some solid ideas and thoughts. I'm picking up what you're putting down.
The Left Position has become that we need to cultivate a sense of reflexive & internalized self-denial in men who cannot successfully embody the role of a Patriarch. I think this is a losing strategy though, because rather than redirecting their (IMO legitimately held) grievances against the actual structure which is making it impossible for them to live meaningful lives, the goal is to diffuse that discontent entirely.
The goal is to get cis men to a level of social self-awareness where you can talk to them without pulling your own hair out or want to throw up. The level of solidarity that will be necessary to overthrow capitalism will require men to be a bit more open to getting along with people who have different goals from themselves and maybe have some theory of mind as to why others might have said goals or needs. The tendency of leftist cis men to gravitate toward Caleb Maupin Thought is really troubling and today we've seen the outcome of that inability to let go of the patriarchal drive for power when the CPI dissolved due to sexual abuse.
This kind of whinging at being told you need basic empathy is the exact same as when white people balk when you tell them to read Settlers. We're not trying to take away your humanity and tell you to go away, we're trying to restore it to you. Consider that even though I've been one of your greatest detractors on here, I've had some of the longest conversations on here with you. Do you think that's because I want you to disappear or because I want you to thrive? If it were the former I would have simply ignored you.
We’re not trying to take away your humanity and tell you to go away, we’re trying to restore it to you.
This should be said more often and can't be repeated enough
Ideology, I do not want to get into another argument with people about this.
I also hate having to explain my life circumstances to people because it takes forever, as most of it is relevant, and nearly all of it is bad. Just as well, when I do try to it makes me want to lie down & stare at the ceiling for an hour; and I often have a number of things I want to do in a given day. In fact, I had been sitting here for the better part of a day trying to write a summary on the matter, but I inevitably get bogged down when it comes to my experiences in Special Education. This is because they involve me enduring a lot of physical abuse as enacted by my, admittedly mainly women, teachers & overseers; consequently it is very difficult to write about in any degree of specificity.
I feel that at some point I must try to explain to you the position I am making my statements from. Because without knowing that I admit that it's easy to read what I write as interchangeable with any other online sad boy.
Until then, however, there is a very fundamental problem between the two of us. That problem is that I have no actual reason to believe anything that you're saying when you say, "We’re not trying to take away your humanity and tell you to go away, we’re trying to restore it to you." I don't have a reason to believe that, because I don't have a reason to believe that anyone in "My Own Community" has any real interest in my wellbeing. They have proven to me through a lifetime of exclusion, neglect, & abuse that they do not think of me as meaningfully human, and that they absolutely will not ever behave in a way that takes into account my best interests, even when they're ostensibly acting on my behalf as a guardian.
And in the end of it all; I don't necessarily believe that you can do that. I don't believe that you would do what would actually help me, and help build an actual IRL community around me that would not treat me poorly.
And given all that, is it that surprising that I'm a particularly stubborn bastard about all this?
I had a longer reply typed up and then I thought about it for a sec. Something that might be more productive than spending a lot of time trying to figure me out might be to hang out with @wtypstanaccount04 on cytube. I don't think I've seen you there.
cytube is a cool and good place
it's great for chatting, I do most of my socializing there
A good dude is more than his ability to dominate.
A good dude wouldn't "dominate" anyone, unless it's part of a consensual and pre-negotiated fantasy fulfillment.
Yes of course! I meant to say that something with core idea. I phrased that section poorly. This was just a brain-dump post in between tasks at work, but yeah a real-ass good dude isn't trying to dominate others. A real-ass dude is trying to build up others.
The MGTOW philosophy is in theory useful for some people. I have a friend who is super depressed that he will never be in a long term hetero romantic relationship. I want to encourage him to find ways to find fulfillment and happiness without being in a relationship but no way in hell I'd point him to any of the MGTOW or men's self help resources, completely toxic af
the suggestion that i should just give up on romance
To clarify, I've never framed my discussions with him like this. More like encouraging other interests or ways of thinking that help him focus on other things.
I want to encourage him to find ways to find fulfillment and happiness without being in a relationship...
Sound like a good friend to me. Building up the homies is great.
...but no way in hell I’d point him to any of the MGTOW or men’s self help resources, completely toxic af
So true. It sucks that there is a legimate need for this sort of resource and it's so bad that the most toxic and venmous swindlers in culture manage to dominate this space.
I want to encourage him to find ways to find fulfillment and happiness without being in a relationship
bold of you to assume that's possible
I very much agree with you there. The idea of just having a positive mindset (in the least slimey way of the use of that phrase) is both cool and good. Selling people the idea of having a positive mindset as some sort of hidden knowledge that pierces the veil of the reality into the realm of untold riches is wack as hell.
