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
The problem i think here is the framing. In terms of media, the young man view is basically the default. Virtually any interest you can look up and your perspective is gonna be catered to.
The reactionary dumbasses have a monopoly on that because explicitly stating it’s a “man’s podcast” or however you want to call it is a signal towards the chauvinist patriarchal, right wing or whstever. it’s incoherent but vaguely pointed in that direction. The media world is basically set up for that demographic as a baseline so you can’t really go “looking for it”.
What i would look for are interviews with specific people whose lives you’re interested in. Or experts on some kind of topic. “Being a man” is a loaded term. I guess i would like a more specific definition on what it is you’re looking for. I think the issue i have with this framing is that definition of what a dude is or isn’t suppose to be or be into is so broad that i wouldn’t even know where to point
Street fight is actually probably the best analogue come to think of it but less focused on current events and more focused on self improvement
The reactionary dumbasses have a monopoly on that because explicitly stating it’s a “man’s podcast” or however you want to call it is a signal towards the chauvinist patriarchal, right wing or whstever
This is correct and a problem; the difference here is it would be explicitly leftist, feminist and queer friendly
What i would look for are interviews with specific people whose lives you’re interested in. Or experts on some kind of topic
Yes it is this exactly but the interviews are with regular people, folks who work for a living, and focus on talking about/understanding their lives. What were their key decisions points? What would they have done differently? And what do they think it means to "be a man?"
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Trillbillies, Old eps of Street Fight Radio, Rev Left.
are they? that's good. I haven't checked in with Brett since shortly after Street Fight but seemed like he was trying to get a few projects going
Bryan's got his Guys pod deal going strong, and Brett has basically decided to touch grass. I still talk with him from time to time.
I'm happy to hear that. I always had a soft spot for Brett. It sounded like he was always really involved locally and really cared about and contributed to the cause
sweet, i actually didn't know about guys and would like to check it out
i also just had a high abv beer and have adhd so i might never follow up on this lol
i don't know why but this sincerity blew me away, i appreciate you!
Honestly I think you're barking up the wrong tree asking that question here. From what I've seen there is basically crickets when it comes to male issues here (other than superficial "be yourself" "be confident" advice).
Whenever people suggest that maybe there should be a leftist version of Joe Rogan, they're basically bullied/harassed/ridiculed for even suggesting it. Yet the right keeps pumping out their podcasts and the left has only one "chad" guy (Hasan Piker). This is a huge blind spot that will absolutely be utilized by the reactionaries. They promise (and partly deliver with PUA advice) what lonely young males want: female companionship. That then hooks those young males to be primed for right wing views. How about a leftist podcaster that also helps guys socialize, get girls, but then leads them to left wing views? Why is that soooo hard to do? Now I'm barking up the wrong tree even discussing it here I guess, as I've seen this issue basically get ignored time and time again in places like this. Oh well
Getting girls being the primary focus of men is a product of patriarchy. That you are less of a man if you aren't having sex.
It's so hard to do because what you're asking for is a reactionary podcast (one premised on and reinforcing patriarchy) that moves people left. That's a huge contradiction to start. Maybe you could smuggle in healthier views about sex and gender but people aren't stupid, they smell through that, and they'll just go to other media.
Left wing media and communities like this one should be breaking down this kind of thinking and helping men to find other avenues to define themselves through.
I think the response to this is what about the left wing incels? Do left wing men just not have sex? And my bad answer is - kindof ya. Left wing men should be pursuing relationships with all kinds of people. Friendships with women and people of all genders and no gender. If you have close relationships with people, sex will come. Maybe that means you have sex years layer than some of your peers- and ya that's what it means to stop using your patriarchal advantages to get sex.
If your goal is to sex women at a bar, then of course right wing media is the place to go.
Some people want leftist to reinforce the very same cultural foundations that uphold capitalism, caused many to be leftists in the first place and is anathema to what generations of socialists have been preaching about. Like what is a "Chad" nothing other than a man that conforms and excels the patriarchal expectations? And for what to chase and gain "respect" by a nebulous crowd of normies because all commies are limp-wristed "nerds" who read books or something? Isnt that just assimilation back into capitalism?
"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
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.
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.
But I also think that “shaming” as a tactic hasn’t succeeded because of the material conditions of men in society, of course.
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.
So the ones who are salvageable will change after some shaming... and those who aren’t won’t be saved.
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.
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)
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.
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.
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.
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!
How about a leftist podcaster that also helps guys socialize, get girls, but then leads them to left wing views? Why is that soooo hard to do?
Because most principled leftists are not scammers who shill their $9999.99 a year hamza hustler redpill mogwarts university deluxe course to prey on vulnerable young men's sex drives. Which is what most of these "young male" oriented podcasts are these days, just a means to get an audience to shill products to *based on false promises. Very unethical.
Furthermore it is very unlikely that someone would be able to learn how to socialize and get girls from a podcast unless they are a teenager with potential and just need to be pointed in the right direction.
Guys with Bryan Quinby, former cohost of Streetfight Radio, a podcast about different types of guys.
https://sites.libsyn.com/458346
What a Hell of a Way to
DieDad is like this sometimes, although it's not the whole point of itIf you're rolling your own, I'd be up for contributing my voice, if you'd have me.
I'm not very well-read on the topic (missed The Will To Change session, sadly) but I'm willing to become so. It is a topic of great importance to me (father of a transmasc teen), I like to think I'm pretty damn good at talking to people, I love talking to people, and I know a lil bit about audio production too.
Also... I hope this doesn't come off as pompous but I've been asked more times than I can count by coworkers and strangers alike if I do radio or podcasts, and when I say no, I always hear about how I should... I think it'd be fun to see what that would be like!
Chiliuminati is basically a dumber, but more wholesome Last Podcast on the Left. I still have my issues with True Crime, so I stick to their alien ones.
Hell, I have my issues with some alien stuff, since it's making a sideshow of mental illness much of the time, but the three bros are still cool in my book.
Chilluminati has my favorite spooky podcast dynamic, where one host toes the line on believing the paranormal thing, one host is just flabbergasted, and the other one is cynical and calls the other two dumb.
I'd listen to it. I'd kinda like to make my own but it's just a matter of time before I say something stupid. I'd totally listen to a room full of dude bros talk about Bell Hooks or how hot demi moore still is.
