I know this article isn't the greatest and verges on sensationalist, but some notes on "the masculinity crisis:" It's the oldest scare tactic in the book, going all the way back to the founding of America and earlier. It's also quite literally ALWAYS been associated with anti-intellectualism, with complaints about effeminate, overly-educated men going back to colonial days. What does this mean? Well, it's complicated. On the one hand, it does stem from the historical trend where the educated labor force has expanded, and how less educated, often more physical laborers react to a diminished role in society. On the other, let's look at some of the things "masculinity crisis" has historically been invoked to comment on. Issues such as women in the workforce, women being able to vote, sexual liberation, et cetera. Tying these two together, we expose the classic trend in masculinity viewed through the conservative lens: There is an order to this world where the strong, physically powerful men have power over weaker, effeminate beings, something being threatened by both changes in productive forces and social mores. This is the framework we will be exploring the modern masculinity crisis in.
The modern masculinity crisis, seen with figures such as Andrew Tate et al. is an extension of this framework, but with an added dimension: The existential quandaries of modern capitalism. Both factors are hugely exacerbated by the plain, simple fact that modern capitalism has stripped people of personal autonomy, and that our current service economy has eroded the need (and by extension, the skills) of self-sufficiency. Many men, faced with the image of the rugged, individualist man and the realities of modern capitalism simultaneously, will naturally come to a deep self-disappointment at their failure to match that same spirit of masculinity. Where people like Andrew Tate prosper, then, is by equating the powerless feelings generated by modern capitalism with the levelling of powers discussed in the previous paragraph, and, through this tenuous connection, misleadingly argue that the path to a man regaining personal power is by engaging in the same kinds of power games discussed in the first paragraph.
The modern masculinity crisis, seen with figures such as Andrew Tate et al. is an extension of this framework, but with an added dimension: The existential quandaries of modern capitalism. Both factors are hugely exacerbated by the plain, simple fact that modern capitalism has stripped people of personal autonomy, and that our current service economy has eroded the need (and by extension, the skills) of self-sufficiency. Many men, faced with the image of the rugged, individualist man and the realities of modern capitalism simultaneously, will naturally come to a deep self-disappointment at their failure to match that same spirit of masculinity. Where people like Andrew Tate prosper, then, is by equating the powerless feelings generated by modern capitalism with the levelling of powers discussed in the previous paragraph, and, through this tenuous connection, misleadingly argue that the path to a man regaining personal power is by engaging in the same kinds of power games discussed in the first paragraph.
❤6
Forwarded from 🏳️🌈🥘 Zuppaposting 🥘🏳️⚧️
io nn so come fa la gente a genuinamente ammirare quest'uomo
😁2
Brief tidbit: You ever heard the scare rumor conservatives made about a kid shitting in a litterbox and the school allowing it because it's his "chosen identity?" That kind of scare probably only works because the conservative position is INCAPABLE of openly acknowledging that social behavior and biological fact are separate things, and need to make up monsters under the bed to justify themselves to alternative positions.