politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Young women are alright, right wing support amongst <35 y.o. men is surprisingly high...
The media is flush with fascist attitudes in a country where going on the computer and listening to fascist rants is all you're allowed to do with your time.
"in a country where [...] all you're allowed to do with your time."
Eh... The same phenomenon is observed all over first world countries and all of those countries you're allowed to do mostly whatever the fuck you want with your free time...
You're free to do what you want and the police are free to rough you up for loitering.
Agreed. I'm a teacher and see it in my classrooms. I often feel that they're not taught how to have healthy community, so they become lil fascists...
They know this shit isn't working, so they're siding with the ones who give them someone to blame... It's that simple....
If they're like my nephew, the "manosphere" gives them easy answers as to why everything seems to suck.
Tell your nephew that Trump just said he’ll ban video games if he wins.
Yup. And it's always women and brown folks.
Don't forget LGBTQ and furries. 🙄
The amount of times I've had to address the "students using litter boxes" schtick is absolutely mind boggling.
It's always a school two towns over, and it's always someone who has no attachment to the school attempting to push it.
It's also the only answer. Society has really neglected boys for a long time now.
It doesn't help that every time we point out how society failed boys, there's always someone who says it's misogynistic to show men any concern....
Being a guy is no cake walk, and if anyone can say that with a straight face it's me.
lights up a cigarette They say women like a bad boy, well, I was so bad at being a boy I became a girl.
Yup. Patriarchy did them dirty. Society told them they had to be strong, stoic, and without emotion. And when that butted up against the realities of being a human we didn't have any community to lead them towards living a good and healthy life.
Patriarchy did em dirty, but feminism also left them behind. It's not just patriarchal society that forces men to be strong and stoic, it's also self-professed feminists, especially women. Feminists say men should be more in touch with their emotions, but when they do so women have no interest in them. That's one of the realities of life you mentioned.
Every single woman I know wants a guy in touch with their emotions. And those who found them, married them.
Tell your friends to stop trying to date under 25 year olds. We get over that shit at about this age.
Cool, good for you. That's not the norm. At any age.
That's still patriarchy, my guy. They've been raised to be complicit in a system that doesn't benefit them, and they're perpetuating it because they don't like how it feels to step outside of it.
I disagree that it's fair to call that patriarchy, but that's beside the point. The failure of feminists to take any action against it or even to sound like they care is what I was getting at. That is by definition not patriarchy, it's the indifference of feminism.
Feminism may not be directly attacking men, but it's also not helping men except as an occasional side effect of helping women. Men have no acceptable paradigm to help them navigate society.
Any attempt at "Men's theory" or some such gets simultaneously attacked by feminists and misogynists and quickly gets subsumed into one of those two camps.
Bro, you're almost there...
Get me over the finish line then.
He/she already tried.
All I see is "everything bad is patriarchy, everything good is feminism" and a steadfast avoidance of the specific issue I brought up.
The expectations the feminists have, are a part of the patriarchy is what I'm guessing they're trying to say, so it's ultimately still the fault of broader patriarchy. I guess what you're effectively saying is that Feminists are affected by patriarchy too I guess, which is obvious given they're human and most humans aren't perfect.
I mean dude think about it. You are almost literally saying that any bad things feminists do are because of the patriarchy. Any failings in feminist theory is because of patriarchy. Any lack of concern for men, any failure to worry about the lack of concern for men, it's all patriarchy.
Does that really ring true to you? I mean, if patriarchy is such a nebulous thing that it's subconsciously affecting the very things that feminists choose to worry about...then we should be able to lay all of feminism's successes at the feet of patriarchy too, right? Women's sufferage? Patriarchy. Freedom of choice? Patriarchy. Women in the workplace? Patriarchy. You may think it was feminism, but clearly the invisible guiding hand of patriarchy is influencing feminists.
Or is it only patriarchy when it's something bad?
Look, I'm not saying there's no such thing as patriarchy. Or misogyny. I absolutely believe that there are systemic injustices in the world perpetrated against women en masse. I also believe that our historically patriarchal society has caused a level of male-centric bias in our world.
I object to the complete and total failure of feminism to admit to any negative effects whatsoever. Feminism is not self-reflective and therefore can never be egalitarian. It will always be a struggle for one group against another.
I think it does ring true. I think you can also say that, in a way, feminism successes do come from patriarchy, that is to say-
It is built upon patriarchy, through the analysis, critique and solutions offered by feminists to it.
What you are critiquing is the hypocrisy and personal individual failings of feminists, which is valid, but is another problem entirely I feel.
Perhaps you are saying these hypocrises and personal individual failings affect alot more feminists than feminists themselves would like to admit? Or perhaps that these hypocrises and personal individual failings have poisoned feminism and it's touted ideals? That feminists who fail in these ways affect the ideology of feminism and that THIS feminism, the "feminism of hypocrites" is what now pervades majority feminist thought?
No, I'm saying that of the list of things feminists are concerned about - wage gap, abortion access, burden of child rearing, intersectional issues - no where on that list is any bad things feminists do. I'm not saying it's systemic (I do happen to believe that, but it's irrelevant at the moment), I'm just saying it happens enough that feminism should be worried about it, at least a little. That lack of concern is damning.
It's like having one abusive cop in a department. Ok, there's one bad cop and 99 good ones, but the 99 good ones are not denouncing him. They are protecting him. So in a way, you have 100 bad cops. If the 99 cops were denouncing him, refusing to work with him, petitioning the police union to disown him, etc...that would be fine. But they never do.
Individual women being shitty is individual women being shitty. Feminism refusing to admit it has a problem in its ranks is feminism being shitty.
If a woman tells a man to having emotions isn't manly then they're not acting as a feminist. That, by definition, is an idea that comes to us from the religious, moral, and civic tradition that produced the modern patriarchy. The people, men and women, who say and do things that reflect and maintain those ideas are failing the ideals of feminism.
To use an analogy, North Korea calls itself a democracy. They do not elect a leader. That doesn't mean democracy has failed, just that this country is doing anti democratic things.
Great! That's a great outlook. Now please start saying those things without a guy like me having to browbeat you into it first. And start saying them to the women who are failing feminism, not to us. If feminism would reject and excise these women, and focus on teaching women to be better (not exclusively focusing on that! Just make it part of the program) then everything I've been talking about would be a nothingburger.
Maybe you should work on your reading comprehension, because that's what I and like 4 other commenters have been saying. Then you can go ahead and submit a complaint to the president of feminism, since you seem to think that they're having a meeting and deciding that you personally aren't masculine enough for them.
Grow up.
Personally, I find my experience to be much the opposite. But, I'm also in my late thirties so, experiences may differ.
You need to hang out with better women, my man.
See? Dismissive, refusal to acknowledge systemic issues, rugged individualism. That's holdovers from patriarchy and feminists should reject that thought process.
When women have a problem, it is society's fault and we should fix it. When men have a problem, it's their own fault and they individually should fix it. That's not fair, and the fact that no one in the feminist sphere seems to give a shit leaves young men deciding to turn to misogynists for moral support.
Red pill types will say, "we see you. This is a problem. You're not crazy." That's very powerful when there's no alternative.
You have a lot more sympathy for right-wing incels than you do for people who don't support genocide.
Jernersayd
#onejoke for Russian shills
We've talked about your singular love for genocide multiple times in the past. In the context of your hatred for feminism and your sympathy for incels, you truly are the voice of centrism.
We've also talked about how the politics mods apparently won't let me defend myself against you even when you follow me to another sub just to pile on me with unrelated...things to say.
HIGHLY UNSPECIFIED THINGS WHICH I AM NOT COMMENTING ON, MODS.
Except to say that it has nothing to do with the discussion at hand, so please talk about something relevant or leave.
Your defense includes mocking genocide victims and screaming "russian shill" at anyone who doesn't agree with your total and unwavering support for genocide for the sheer love of it.
Your ideas regarding support for genocide are right-wing. Just like your sympathy for incels and your rejection of feminism. Your support for right wing ideology and policy is consistent.
I explained how the two are related. If you don't want to interact with me, don't.
Dude, you jumped into this conversation. I don't have much choice but to interact with you.
Also, for the record, I disagree with your characterization of me.
You can ignore me instead of belittling genocide and screaming that I'm a Russian shill. But then that would result in someone saying the genocide is bad without being screamed at, and you can't have that.
Then I'll amend it. Life sucks for everyone, not just the people you identify with. That's not feminism's fault. Quit whining about it.
Can't argue with that.
Literally.
I mean, you could state your case without accusing me of being a Russian shill, but that would require your position to be defensible.
🤷♂️
You can fault the Right for a lot of things but they got there first on this one. They have a story for why things suck and they’re pounding the drum on it relentlessly. It doesn’t matter that this story is full of holes when the alternative is not compelling.
Yup. The propaganda machine moved quick when they realized this population could be manipulated into action outside of message boards.