I published a piece on this on the 11th, showing how the directions of feminism changed post 2016 and what the costs might be for the 2024 election and culture going forwards.
"In the aftermath of 2016, feminism did not reassess its goals. They did not try to unite women poor and wealthy, urban and rural, young and old, behind a programme to challenge the patriarchy and neoliberalism. Instead, feminism doubled down on the politics of personality, sexuality, and identity. It is easier to unite people against a common collective enemy, than provide a programme for change, or a set of policies to inspire people. If people were reacting to personalities, and what these personalities reveal about themselves, they did not evaluate their interests in relation to structural forces and social class. Borrowing from Republican playbook, feminists claimed to be anti-establishment without challenging the establishment. They did so by demonizing their opponents. Trump’s personality was to become symbolic of a collective personality. A collective personality that betrayed a physio-moral sickness that threatened America and moral decency- toxic masculinity."
So Gen Z thinks Hitler had 'a few good ideas'? Then answer, "Yeah, you may be right. Like, he tried to kill off all those homos. *That* was a good idea, don't you agree? What if we just killed them all off, including the kids? It's quicker than 'transing' them to make them normal. And after all, it's not like HItler had a problem with killing kids, either."
I think something interesting that the Democrat/Republican divide in Men reveals something about Industrialized society in general. It's been a very tiny sliver of human history that Humanity has been both generally at peace and healthy; in that context masculinity does and should mean something different than the overwhelming majority of history where it meant specifically "protector", "fighter", "hunter" and has shifted to something more akin to "trader", "producer", "worker".
And as having objective merit, being a hard worker, being wealthy, have been increasing condemned by, especially Leftist, society these new categories have come under fire. What does that leave? On the Left the answer is Men should be more like women, more emotional, less dangerous and productive. On the Right the answer is, more that men should move *back* to being the warrior/protector/hunter.
Why I subscribe: " At least Russians don’t have to grapple with the morals of honoring really controversial historical figures like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson." Stating the too often ignored implications of actions in our society in an entertaining way. Thank you.
"It is critical to address the many filtered layers of media influencing, academic conjuring, and political maneuvering that marginalizes the boys and men in our culture. It’s no wonder boys and young men feel like they are at the center of nothingness, that they are a political football, the media’s masculine trope, and an academic piñata."
I am saddened by this race. My mom wants to live long enough to see a female POTUS. I believe a fully vetted female Dem could have won this term by abandoning Biden’s macro economic themes and making a real pitch toward working poor. But instead we got Kamala.
Or Condoleezza Rice, who I had hoped would be the first woman president. And she's smarter than either Haley or Harris (though it sometimes seems a turkey sandwich has a higher IQ than Harris). The thing is, while Condi is a patriotic American who served her country well, she doesn't seem to have the narcissism level required to run for high office.
Or Condoleezza Rice, who I had hoped would be the first woman president. And she's smarter than either Haley or Harris (though it sometimes seems a turkey sandwich has a higher IQ than Harris). The thing is, while Condi is a patriotic American who served her country well, she doesn't seem to have the narcissism level required to run for high office.
“New York magazine's Rebecca Traister praised this species of Democratic man as
‘newly confident in his equal-to-subsidiary status: happily deferential, unapologetically supportive of women's rights, committed to partnership.’"
“Happily deferential”? “Newly confident in his equal-to-subsidiary status”? Sounds like the perfect man as dreamed up by women who don’t actually like them except as sycophants. I happen to prefer actual men myself; Ms. Traister and her sisterhood are welcome to the doormats.
Today, Matt Taibbi did a piece on this Harris/waltz ad around men voting for Harris. I thought it was a spoof but it makes you wonder about the people around her who think this is an effective way to gather men’s votes
OMG I cannot believe the Dems are so desperate they have Walz posing like a macho man!!! LOL And to think they made fun of JD Vance, accusing him of using eye make up. No, folks, those are his genuinely beautiful eyes!!! ;)
This crap about Walz is hilarious, though not as insipid as Kamala even being in the conversation. Both are jokes and should be/will be ignored. If the DNC wins the office you will see them less often and only in safe situations. Not sure Trump is much better but he is not a claymation cartoon.
It is interesting that subscribers have a need, a really strong need, to tell us that they are leaving TFP. More often than not, we have no idea to which forests they are headed, and in rare cases we do. Let me spell it out. We(?), most certainly I don't care if you go to pastures new. Just go, preferably silently. Not possible? Then there is Milton: "At last he rose, and twitch'd his mantle blue:
To-morrow to fresh woods, and pastures new." The person to whom Milton was referring did not shout: Hey y'all I am leaving, yes I am really leaving. Did you notice!? I am leaving!
20% like Hitler's ideas?
Time to make Leon Uris required reading in H.S., nationwide.
I published a piece on this on the 11th, showing how the directions of feminism changed post 2016 and what the costs might be for the 2024 election and culture going forwards.
"In the aftermath of 2016, feminism did not reassess its goals. They did not try to unite women poor and wealthy, urban and rural, young and old, behind a programme to challenge the patriarchy and neoliberalism. Instead, feminism doubled down on the politics of personality, sexuality, and identity. It is easier to unite people against a common collective enemy, than provide a programme for change, or a set of policies to inspire people. If people were reacting to personalities, and what these personalities reveal about themselves, they did not evaluate their interests in relation to structural forces and social class. Borrowing from Republican playbook, feminists claimed to be anti-establishment without challenging the establishment. They did so by demonizing their opponents. Trump’s personality was to become symbolic of a collective personality. A collective personality that betrayed a physio-moral sickness that threatened America and moral decency- toxic masculinity."
https://interpocula.substack.com/p/the-figure-of-feminism-since-2016
So Gen Z thinks Hitler had 'a few good ideas'? Then answer, "Yeah, you may be right. Like, he tried to kill off all those homos. *That* was a good idea, don't you agree? What if we just killed them all off, including the kids? It's quicker than 'transing' them to make them normal. And after all, it's not like HItler had a problem with killing kids, either."
I think something interesting that the Democrat/Republican divide in Men reveals something about Industrialized society in general. It's been a very tiny sliver of human history that Humanity has been both generally at peace and healthy; in that context masculinity does and should mean something different than the overwhelming majority of history where it meant specifically "protector", "fighter", "hunter" and has shifted to something more akin to "trader", "producer", "worker".
And as having objective merit, being a hard worker, being wealthy, have been increasing condemned by, especially Leftist, society these new categories have come under fire. What does that leave? On the Left the answer is Men should be more like women, more emotional, less dangerous and productive. On the Right the answer is, more that men should move *back* to being the warrior/protector/hunter.
Why I subscribe: " At least Russians don’t have to grapple with the morals of honoring really controversial historical figures like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson." Stating the too often ignored implications of actions in our society in an entertaining way. Thank you.
I hope you will enjoy this piece, Soft-Censoring the Male and the Masculine in our Culture https://open.substack.com/pub/gibm/p/soft-censoring-the-male-and-the-masculine?r=7v0pb&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
"It is critical to address the many filtered layers of media influencing, academic conjuring, and political maneuvering that marginalizes the boys and men in our culture. It’s no wonder boys and young men feel like they are at the center of nothingness, that they are a political football, the media’s masculine trope, and an academic piñata."
I am saddened by this race. My mom wants to live long enough to see a female POTUS. I believe a fully vetted female Dem could have won this term by abandoning Biden’s macro economic themes and making a real pitch toward working poor. But instead we got Kamala.
Or there could have been Nikki Haley...I guess someday there might be. Kamala is an embarrassment.
Or Condoleezza Rice, who I had hoped would be the first woman president. And she's smarter than either Haley or Harris (though it sometimes seems a turkey sandwich has a higher IQ than Harris). The thing is, while Condi is a patriotic American who served her country well, she doesn't seem to have the narcissism level required to run for high office.
Or Condoleezza Rice, who I had hoped would be the first woman president. And she's smarter than either Haley or Harris (though it sometimes seems a turkey sandwich has a higher IQ than Harris). The thing is, while Condi is a patriotic American who served her country well, she doesn't seem to have the narcissism level required to run for high office.
Oh yeh I’d be so down with Condi Rice but agree she’d never put up with the microscope and doesn’t need to.
And the turkeys are all insulted now!😬😬
“New York magazine's Rebecca Traister praised this species of Democratic man as
‘newly confident in his equal-to-subsidiary status: happily deferential, unapologetically supportive of women's rights, committed to partnership.’"
“Happily deferential”? “Newly confident in his equal-to-subsidiary status”? Sounds like the perfect man as dreamed up by women who don’t actually like them except as sycophants. I happen to prefer actual men myself; Ms. Traister and her sisterhood are welcome to the doormats.
Today, Matt Taibbi did a piece on this Harris/waltz ad around men voting for Harris. I thought it was a spoof but it makes you wonder about the people around her who think this is an effective way to gather men’s votes
https://youtu.be/jLzYPbtklGs
Unidentified drones that can’t be caught on both coasts over a span of a year?!?! Why is this not a bigger story?! Terrifying!
OMG I cannot believe the Dems are so desperate they have Walz posing like a macho man!!! LOL And to think they made fun of JD Vance, accusing him of using eye make up. No, folks, those are his genuinely beautiful eyes!!! ;)
I've seen two vids of Walz dressed in women's clothing and dancing around. Cant get any more masculine than that!!
Yeah, there’s something off-putting about Walz. He’s pretending to be something he’s not.
This crap about Walz is hilarious, though not as insipid as Kamala even being in the conversation. Both are jokes and should be/will be ignored. If the DNC wins the office you will see them less often and only in safe situations. Not sure Trump is much better but he is not a claymation cartoon.
It is interesting that subscribers have a need, a really strong need, to tell us that they are leaving TFP. More often than not, we have no idea to which forests they are headed, and in rare cases we do. Let me spell it out. We(?), most certainly I don't care if you go to pastures new. Just go, preferably silently. Not possible? Then there is Milton: "At last he rose, and twitch'd his mantle blue:
To-morrow to fresh woods, and pastures new." The person to whom Milton was referring did not shout: Hey y'all I am leaving, yes I am really leaving. Did you notice!? I am leaving!
No idea what this is about. Explain?
Good Front Page today.
Good Front Page today.