This was in my high school and early college years, later on in life I was able develop romantic relationships with them and healthy platonic relationships. I’ll be upfront and say a lot of the times if a straight dude hates women vehemently, it’s probably because he’s not getting laid or able to form any semblance of a romance with a woman.

  • MagisterSinister [he/him,comrade/them]
    ·
    4 years ago

    I think you’re conflating frustrated virgins with angry divorced MGTOW dads

    No, i'm saying that the frustrated virgin, the angry divroced MGTOW dad, that these both take their individual frustration and latch onto existing ideology that permeates vast parts of our culture and has, at its core, nothing to do with their personal relationship status. These emotional issues are extremely important on the individual level, they are driving factors in manosphere recruiting, but that all comes in at a much later stage.

    • queenjamie [none/use name]
      ·
      4 years ago

      I see. It seems you're pretty well read up on anthropology. It seems like, as you said, that treating women as prized property has been around since way before capitalism. So do you think the angry, frustrated male thing might be something that has just been a part of human history, whether part of "human nature" or not?

      • MagisterSinister [he/him,comrade/them]
        ·
        4 years ago

        It seems like, as you said, that treating women as prized property has been around since way before capitalism.

        I think the popular notion is that it's been around since the agrarian revolution, when you suddenly have the concept of land as inheritable property and generational wealth comes into play.

        So do you think the angry, frustrated male thing might be something that has just been a part of human history, whether part of “human nature” or not?

        Angry, frustrated men are an easy pick when you're looking for soldiers, so yeah, that seems likely. That's just an emotional state where a lot of people are receptive to being offered a target to lash out at. My guess is that every form of charismatic rulership could, and in many cases has, utilized emotions as powerful and as easy to stoke as anger. I also think that's a really dangerous thing to do as a movement, government etc. because once you go all in on driving people into a frothing rage, you end up with a bunch of planless berzerkers who tazer their balls or trample each other. I actually view that as one of the inherent flaws of fascism, that they rely so much on their followers being made more and more emotionally malleable. It's definitely not how you win wars. But it's a very easy way to start them.

        • queenjamie [none/use name]
          ·
          4 years ago

          you end up with a bunch of planless berzerkers who tazer their balls or trample each other.

          Talk about "alpha" lol.