|
ascribing every form of human misery, inequity and moral turpitude solely to capitalism remains as dumb as ever tbh I also find the suggestion that incels need but embrace feminism to find happiness to be highly suspect, since while concern over toxic masculinity/gender roles would seem to be relevant, as it's actually practiced as an ideology/social movement it barely pays lip-service to whatever legitimate concerns they might have re: being unfuckable/socially unsuccessful and offers little to them in practical terms - instead it always seems to read like a suggestion that their need for human intimacy should be subordinated to the more important concerns of other people obviously cultivating empathy is incredibly useful in not being a social troglodyte, and feminism is worth supporting on its own merits, but you very clearly don't actually need to have non-regressive Correct Opinions to not be an incel
|
#
¿
May 11, 2018 22:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Jun 1, 2024 19:58 |
|
|
KaptainKrunk posted:they're not unfuckable they just don't want to gently caress the other unfuckable women, of which there are plenty I'll freely admit "whatever legitimate concerns" is doing some work there tractor fanatic posted:they're different solutions to different problems. incels need to embrace feminism to cure them of their psychotic misogyny, and need to develop empathy to solve their social retardation. some basic empathy actually fixes both issues, while embracing feminism as an ideology without fixing the social retardation creates a bunch of cringeworthy "male-feminists" and people who are absolutely terrified of approaching women LGD has issued a correction as of 22:52 on May 11, 2018 |
|
#
¿
May 11, 2018 22:45
|
|
|
wizard on a water slide posted:or to put it another way: that thing you're suggesting bad feminists do (and I don't even disagree that some of them are weird and selfish; they're human beings) is the same thing as saying "these guys need to learn empathy" nah, that's absolutely not what they're saying- you're conflating correlation/causation and taking the relatively uncontroversial proposition that having a well-developed sense of empathy would make you far more likely to embrace some flavor of feminism and suggesting that adhering to a developed ideology will actually fix someone's basic problems in relating to other humans in a healthy way, which is an extremely dubious proposition (ideologies are hardly all equal, but even good doctrine seems to have quite some difficulty creating good men in a moral sense, much less good men in a functional one) it's also odd that you move "subordination" to a purely relationship context in your previous post humans are social animals and (if not necessarily sex) they need healthy forms of connection/intimacy, and if someone can't make those connections it's a real problem in their lives they actually need to address directly - it strikes me as extremely wrongheaded to equate the sacrifices and compromises people make in normal/functioning relationships with a decision to embrace a social/political movement that barely cares to give lip-service to your personal needs and has little in the way of actionable advice over working on your problems directly e: (I suppose I should have weighted in on the related conversation that started after these original posts, but it had only been a couple pages so seemed easier to address the source than people's interpretations of it) vv nope vv LGD has issued a correction as of 23:32 on May 29, 2018 |
|
#
¿
May 29, 2018 23:21
|
|