I'm starting to realize that even in the localized leftist communities we're involved, we need to start creating spaces where men can freely talk about these issues in a leftist environment. Unfortunately, we don't have much power to be open with it in our own communities due to how they'll react. Even more dangerous when they're brainwashed by ideas of men that make them automatically distrustful of men, even at the start.
yeah i agree. i found this space on reddit and it has helped me greatly. thanks for all you do.
The modern political left has become extremely anti-egalitarian on the gender axis: they discriminate against men.
And they do it relatively openly, though they rarely, if ever, explicitly admit to it and they often claim to be gender egalitarians.
But if you're going to make a post talking about the misandry found in the left, without mentioning the equal amounts of misandry found on the right, then I find that to be a little disingenuous.
Many of men's greatest issues like effective access to mental health care, effective social safety net, accessible and welcoming social environments of neurodivergent men etc... Are all things that are being fought against by the right.
This is going to be speculative, but when you recognize the amount of money in government and how the left has historically been trying to provide social safety nets for everyone, you can see that this creates certain social pressures. If there's a lot of money in helping people, then there's going to be a feedback loop of people financially interested in promoting even more investments in helping people.
The right tends to stand in opposition to this. And what the left has learned is that while the right will be willing to burn everything down just to stop a tiny little welfare project that helps everyone, it turns out that if this welfare project only helps women, then the right won't stand in its way, it may even be supportive of it. This has created a massive industry that focuses on helping only women. Some of the money involved ends up for the promotion of misandrist ideologies that help to legitimize programs that help exclusively women, because that's where the money is.
My perspective is that leftist type people want to help men and women equality. But the right makes it impossible. Over time, this situation combined with the sustained power of money has warped leftist ideology away from what they'd ideally want to see.
The right is just as much to blame for all this as the left. I would argue it is even more to blame for it.
I do see that and I am working on a post like this for the right wing, I took me months to work on this post.
The Right wins by default on men's issues not because they have anything to offer men, but because the Left is so sandbagged by misandry and anti-male paranoia that simply doing nothing is an appealing alternative.
Left wing feminists have the most abhorrent views of men. I'm a left winger, but I disagree with most left wingers and feminists about men's issues.
true because doing anything for men is seen as coddling them,
can you explain why you feel this way?
first off, Jordan Peterson is like, King of the Incels. Basing a moral argument around him is pretty sus
I wasn't basing an argument around him but the hypocrisy that we want men to be emotionally vulnerable, until they have politics we don't like the it is fuck them.
That is what I was highlighting, not that I like Jordan Peterson, as I hate his politics, but If you want men to be vulnerable, it can't be just men who align with what the left inherently agrees with. It has to be extended to everyone
The patriarchy has never existed in north American history. Most of the gendered oppression have been caused by the monarchy, specifically coverture practices. We had kings and queens (both of whom who have equal powers to create laws before it got taken away). You're also using the apax fallacy to judge men as a whole by the actions of a few men and women in power who are in the minority. The only reason we consider it a patriarchy is due to patriarchy theory (most positions in power are held by men, therefore men oppress women) which is not only rooted in apax fallacy, it's designed to encourage misandry on a societal level.
Feminism has never been about equality. Many 'proto-feminists' such as Mary Wollstonecraft who actually written books about the rights of women and men never called herself a feminist. It was academic feminists from 1848 and onwards who claimed them as such. The ideology of feminism where it classifies men as the oppressor class of women (thanks Elizabeth cady staton) and developing concepts such as the patriarchy theory (kate miller, andrea dworkin and the like) that IS misandry, yet it gaslight everyone into thinking it's about equality.
"Men saying "it's not fair" rings hollow when men have been oppressing women for millennia, and all women want is to be treated equally." Rich people in power have been oppressing everybody else for millennia of history, it just shows up differently based on gender. That's how these things have always been.
I never said that I like Jordan Peterson but emotional vulnerability from a man you disagree with isn't worthy of denigration.
Also what about all of the men who have been oppressed over the years alongside these women? All the men that have been treated differently?
Also when men complain about any issue, there is someone like you chiming in saying this kinda stuff.
The left has a good ideology of egalitarianism. In practice, the Left is bad. They have become gynocentric, which is not egalitarian.
I don't know much about Jordan Peterson. I had help from other figures before I discovered peterson personally. Aba and preach I've seen a lot of their channels and I like how nuanced they are with their takes. Of course I don't agree with all of them, but they were the first dudes who got me on the right mental track.
I don't know much about Jordan Peterson. I had help from other figures before I discovered peterson personally. Aba and preach I've seen a lot of their channels and I like how nuanced they are with their takes. Of course I don't agree with all of them, but they were the first dudes who got me on the right mental track.
Oof yeah that was not a kind reaction. Too often people dehumanize folks they disagree with, and laughing at Peterson crying is clearly that.
Just to provide a contrast, here's a left winger's empathetic take on Jordan Peterson: https://www.tiktok.com/...
I hadn't seen that dang dad, thanks for sharing. His videos seem like they're explicitly not dismissing male issues though? He's saying "these issues are real and valid. Fixing these issues is not something men alone can do."
I generally agree that a lot of the issues men face come from the current power structure. I agree with that dang dad that the current power structure fucks men over.
You're painting "give a man a mission" as a bad thing, but I'm not really sure what the alternative is. If there are issues men face (which there are), men need to be involved in solving them, right?
that a communist or socialist revolution would better the lives of anyone, as in history, it truly hasnt and in fact has been more destructive to peoples lives.
Things like universal healthcare and social safety nets have made people's lives better in other countries, and would make people's lives better here. Having accessible mental health care would directly help men.
the presumtion that men have any privilage that men have some one up over women. and have never been the victims of a society that they themselves built to benefit themselves, but has them suffering
Nobody on the left things that individual men have never been the victims of society - e.g. toxic masculinity. The whole point is that everyone is getting shit on right now.
Things like universal healthcare and social safety nets have made people's lives better in other countries, and would make people's lives better here. Having accessible mental health care would directly help men.
Universal healthcare and social safety nets are not (necessarily) socialism. All universal healthcare means is that everyone has a right to healthcare. Doesn't say how. The state could own the healthcare apparatus like the NHS, or it could be simply a private insurance mandate supplemented by plans for low-income individuals. Socialism just means that workers own the means of production. I personally agree that universal healthcare and a reasonable social safety net are both necessary.
Nobody on the left things that individual men have never been the victims of society - e.g. toxic masculinity.
I'm just curious, do you think toxic feminity is also a thing? Or just toxic masculinity? If both then I guess you're consistent, but I personally object to either label. I prefer the term "toxic gender expectations", especially because either gender can impose toxic expectations on the other or their own.
Also, most feminists do believe that even if men have ever been victims of injustice, men have never suffered because of their gender Something I think is a complete lie. The draft is a perfect example.
i dont really disagree with that dang dad on alot.
what i meant by "give a man a mission" is by in leftist spaces, it is often times the reaction of any critisism that men have of feminism is often times reflected back at some cause that is beneficial to the left. Ie the clip of "you are angry at late stage capitalism" tiktok it is often times used as a way of just pacifying men with something to do, instead of addressing their arguments. ]
"Things like universal healthcare and social safety nets have made people's lives better in other countries, and would make people's lives better here. Having accessible mental health care would directly help men."
yeah, i question this due to places like venezuela, cuba and others that have had socialist coups happen on their soil. they have had worse economic woes overtime as a result
"Nobody on the left things that individual men have never been the victims of society - e.g. toxic masculinity. The whole point is that everyone is getting shit on right now."
yeah well it seems that the left is rather fixated on blaming men (specifically cis het white men) as a collective, even men who fit in the marginalized identities that they say they want to protect, rather than saying everyone is getting shit, so lets work together to fix it.
I could see how being redirected to liberal causes could feel like dismissing your concerns. If you bring bring up an issue that isn't being talked about, and people react with "oh. yeah we're already working on that - wanna join?" it might feel like they're more interested in you joining their cause than in the issue you're raising. After all, they haven't been talking about the issue you raised, so how can they say they're already working on it?
The reason is that the left is fighting for all kinds of issues, and when different groups talk about the issues they face, they start to see common themes.
Conversations like "people hate you because you're gay? People hate me because I'm lesbian!" end up with people working together under the same banner, despite the unique issues that each group faces. As more groups voice the issues they face, they find solidarity in existing banners. For example, being trans is completely different than being gay or lesbian (it's not who you're attracted to, it's who you are), but gay/lesbian folks heard trans issues and said "lots of that stuff is what we're already working on - wanna join?" This wasn't dismissing trans issues, it was making both voices stronger. LGBT folks unite under the same banner, and issues for one group are issues for them all (do not try to minimize trans issues to someone that's gay/lesbian).
The fact is that men (specifically cis het white men) are relative newcomers in the "getting shit on" world. This is NOT minimizing the issues we face - they're real and should be taken seriously - they're just new (see: women got the right to vote about 100 years ago). Folks on the left offering a "mission" are not asking you to ignore your issues in favor of theirs, they're saying "oh dang that's messed up. Add it the list, let's go fix this shit." I really like that dang dad's focus on solidarity - We fight for them. They fight for us.
yeah well it seems that the left is rather fixated on blaming men (specifically cis het white men) as a collective, even men who fit in the marginalized identities that they say they want to protect, rather than saying everyone is getting shit, so lets work together to fix it.
Also an understandable reaction. The left often talks about "systemic" problems - things not caused by an individual, but by how things are set up. It's not hard to see why men as a collective would be blamed for systemic problems - after all, only men could vote up until 100 years ago. But the left is realizing that it isn't cis het white men that were the problem, since they're also getting shit on now too - it's the rich. It's always been the rich. And that's why we're seeing "no war but class war."
To be clear, there are still folks talking about men as a collective being a problem. My only advise is to mentally correct "men" to "the stereotypical men with traits that this person thinks negatively of" and not take it personally.
The fact is that men (specifically cis het white men) are relative newcomers in the "getting shit on" world. This is NOT minimizing the issues we face - they're real and should be taken seriously - they're just new (see: women got the right to vote about 100 years ago).
No, this is a misrepresentation. Most men didn't have the right to vote either, just the landowners. If you look at when men got universal suffrage, and when women did, that's often close together. And then we're not even speaking of black men and women.
But the left is realizing that it isn't cis het white men that were the problem, since they're also getting shit on now too - it's the rich. It's always been the rich. And that's why we're seeing "no war but class war."
Yes, it's always been the rich. Not men. And where are we seeing "no war but class war"? The modern "left" appears to be in the pockets of the rich, always looking for the next minority to champion and forgetting to champion the working class.
To be clear, there are still folks talking about men as a collective being a problem. My only advise is to mentally correct "men" to "the stereotypical men with traits that this person thinks negatively of" and not take it personally.
And I would advise to not take bigotry that lightly. We should expose that and demand that people do better.
No, this is a misrepresentation. Most men didn't have the right to vote either, just the landowners. If you look at when men got universal suffrage, and when women did, that's often close together. And then we're not even speaking of black men and women.
"By 1776 at least 60 percent of adult white males were able to vote, and the proportion expanded significantly by 1787"
So most white men could vote since the country was founded.
Property qualifications were then steadily dropped (and never added for white men):
"The 1828 presidential election was the first in which non-property-holding white males could vote in the vast majority of states"
"The last state to abolish property qualification was North Carolina in 1856."
Do you consider the civil rights movement "close together" with now? Because that's the same amount of time it was between all men getting the right to vote and women being given the right to vote.
And where are we seeing "no war but class war"?
In the TikTok from OP: "(This is the tiktok in question https://www.tiktok.com/...)"
" My only advise is to mentally correct "men" to "the stereotypical men with traits that this person thinks negatively of" and not take it personally."
yeah except they arent saying this, they are saying men, and assigning those tropes to men? also how are we supposed to not take it negatively when they are the ones who control the converstion, on mens issues?
Cause that's all they are - tropes. stereotypes. They're the same stereotypes that we're recognizing as harmful expectations. When we say "men are expected to be X" that's the same thing - the reason we're expected to be X is because "you need to be X or you're not a real man."
We feel the ways in which society's stereotype of men hurt us, and those same expectations cause harm to other folks as well. It's fair for folks to complain about that, but it's complaining about the stereotypes.
The left wants to change toxic gender roles, just like we do. Do you have better ideas for actually getting things to change that doesn't involve the left? We can complain about society all day long, but actually changing it requires work. The door is open for you to join the fight and take part in the conversation - it just requires solidarity and a willingness to fight for others too.
thanks for using Leebra!
go to feed...
I am not prepared to let go of my left-wing values the way most of the people claiming to be left-wing have been doing. I am an egalitarian, and I am not prepared to treat men as less deserving of human rights, of care and consideration, of protection against discrimination, and so on.
But yeah, if you are on the left and care about men, you often have to carve your own way and swim against the stream of normalized misandry. But that's why we have this community.
save