Treacle Toes
Time
3mins...
Outlining the priniciples of 'free speech' doesn't mean the nonsense you are saying is true.
Outlining the priniciples of 'free speech' doesn't mean the nonsense you are saying is true.
I don’t think he’s claiming that.3mins...
Outlining the priniciples of 'free speech' doesn't mean the nonsense you are saying is true.
Sure why not!Not watching the vid, but joining the thread if that's alright?
You don't need permission for anythingI felt like I need to ask permission - me being over cautious about posting here again. I don't want to just jump in and invade space, as it were.
You don't need permission for anything
I felt like I need to ask permission - me being over cautious about posting here again. I don't want to just jump in and invade space, as it were.
Absolutely this. These are kinda difficult things to discuss though.You don't need permission for anything
I don’t think he’s claiming that.
I’d like to reply to this but I’m not sure what to say. I dunno what a derp is and I’m not entirely sure what point you’re making. You don’t recognise his depiction of masculinity? You don’t think males dominate conflict and war cross culturally? Or you mean you individually aren’t like that (which is fair enough but kind of misses the point).Dear God Edie. I've got through 11.5 minutes so far and its nails down a chalkboard unbearable.
Even if we try and ignore the obvious charisma blackhole we are left with what he is saying. I know you don't have to have any qualifications to be teacher at a private school (or background checks) but I do wonder what his subject was? It ain't history or philosophy that's for sure.
He seems obsessed by conflict, violence and war. I also feel like I was being lectured on what masculinity is and what it is to being a man. His reality I do not recognise at all. I don't recognise his depicture of male-ness and when I think about my girlfriend I think he's talking about another species than her.
Fuck! I think I'm being mansplained by a unpleasant derp. This is what happens if you start with a conclusion and work back from there.
It made me wonder if I’d misunderstood the whole thing to be honest. I do fundamentally think that men should protect and provide for women and children, and that the biological role of women with respect to being pregnant and caring for small children makes us vulnerable and needing that. I also think predominantly women’s work (caring work) is undervalued and want to discuss that. That’s feminism for me, not arguing there are no biological differences between men and women.I thought it interesting, I watched all of it but was interrupted by a call in the middle. His idea of the patriarchy is one quite a lot of men and women will agree with but not all.
provide procreate protect
Hmm ...
Why do you find it insulting to men?OK. Finished now. Its bizarre and frankly insulting to men. He traduces us and makes out we are little more than biology with no context and no agency at all. I don't think this man should be around young men at all so I'm glad he was sacked, if he was.
Sub Jordan Peterson tosh.
I’d like to reply to this but I’m not sure what to say. I dunno what a derp is and I’m not entirely sure what point you’re making. You don’t recognise his depiction of masculinity? You don’t think males dominate conflict and war cross culturally? Or you mean you individually aren’t like that (which is fair enough but kind of misses the point).
that is longer than I made it - maybe half a dozen flat out lies by that point, and the Christina Hoff Sommers quote plus the "comedy" cartoon made it very clear where all this was coming fromOnly 2 minutes in...
Challenging patriarchy and how those institutionalised & lived power dynamics negatively affect women's lives is not the same as 'rubbishing the very existence of men'. That's like saying talking about racism causes racism to exist. It's an excuse.
Yes, he is saying it’s something inherent. Biological. That’s exactly what he’s saying. You disagree and think all gender is socially constructed?He's making out like its something inherent in us rather than something that is forced upon us. Sure, there are some guys who want to go brain each other for 12 rounds but for the rest of us it is a situation forced upon us.
His depiction of sport has no context at all. I think its pretty clear now that given the opportunity young girls want to play football. Want to play Rugby, hell even some women want to get into a boxing ring and fair play to them because I don't have the guts to do that.
Why do you find it insulting to men?
I think arguing about whether men or women have had it harder is meaningless. There are clear disadvantages to being either man or woman, especially working class upper class much less so. I do appreciate your point tho that there’s a bit of a MRA flavour to it.He's using the classic MRA trope that men have had it much harder than women because war and violence. He then kinda goes on to elevate this as some sort of male burden. Billions and billions of young men have died in the most brutal and pointless way because of this reasoning.
How do you reconcile wanting equality for women in terms of pay etc with wanting men to provide for women and children?It made me wonder if I’d misunderstood the whole thing to be honest. I do fundamentally think that men should protect and provide for women and children, and that the biological role of women with respect to being pregnant and caring for small children makes us vulnerable and needing that. I also think predominantly women’s work (caring work) is undervalued and want to discuss that. That’s feminism for me, not arguing there are no biological differences between men and women.
Yes, he is saying it’s something inherent. Biological. That’s exactly what he’s saying. You disagree and think all gender is socially constructed?