That the extreme overreaction to Andrew Tate so closely mirrors the overreaction to Jordan Peterson really exposes their detractors for what they are. The messaging from these two men could not be more different: there is really only one common message that they have both been consistent on, and it appears to be the message that upsets the regime the most: they seem to be absolutely horrified and furious that anybody would actually turn to young men and say, "You are not a piece of shit."
He really sold out lately. Backing TERFs, backing "porn bad" cults and then supporting a "women's rights" war in Iran.
The message that upsets the regime the most: They seem to be absolutely horrified and furious that anybody would actually turn to young men and say, "You are not a piece of shit."
And people still doubt me on the nature of the regime.
I actually don't agree with you that there is a secret cabal of feminists coordinating a global conspiracy. I think much of our society's prioritization of women's wants and needs over men is an emergent phenomenon that can be explained largely by biology.
To the extent that there is a global conspiracy, the people behind it, who are mostly men, are absolutely happy to let feminism run rampant: partly because of its effects on reproduction, and partly because nothing scares those people more than the prospect of a generation of young men with skill, confidence and nothing to lose. They would rather have young men be emasculated, demoralized and consumed by self-loathing, too weak to mount any effective resistance.
I think much of our society's prioritization of women's wants and needs over men is an emergent phenomenon that can be explained largely by biology.
What about the sheer number of women in power, all acting to advance women's position in society?
To the extent that there is a global conspiracy, the people behind it, who are mostly men, are absolutely happy to let feminism run rampant: partly because of its effects on reproduction, and partly because nothing scares those people more than the prospect of a generation of young men with skill, confidence and nothing to lose.
Except if they were happy with the system, they wouldn't want to destroy it. It doesn't make sense to say that they want young men to be kicked down by the system because they won't resist, because nobody would resist a system that's working for them either - there has to be some level of sadism in why they are targeted so openly and obviously, and if you think about it long enough, you can't land on anyone other than women who would find that enjoyable to inflict on people.
It doesn't make sense to say they want young men to be kicked down by the system because they won't resist it.
First of all, yes it does. Secondly, I never said I believe it will actually work. Men have proven to be more resilient, and more willing to fight for their freedom, than I think the social engineering aficionados were prepared for.
That the extreme overreaction to Andrew Tate so closely mirrors the overreaction to Jordan Peterson really exposes their detractors for what they are. The messaging from these two men could not be more different: there is really only one common message that they have both been consistent on, and it appears to be the message that upsets the regime the most: they seem to be absolutely horrified and furious that anybody would actually turn to young men and say, "You are not a piece of shit."
He really sold out lately. Backing TERFs, backing "porn bad" cults and then supporting a "women's rights" war in Iran.
And people still doubt me on the nature of the regime.
I actually don't agree with you that there is a secret cabal of feminists coordinating a global conspiracy. I think much of our society's prioritization of women's wants and needs over men is an emergent phenomenon that can be explained largely by biology.
To the extent that there is a global conspiracy, the people behind it, who are mostly men, are absolutely happy to let feminism run rampant: partly because of its effects on reproduction, and partly because nothing scares those people more than the prospect of a generation of young men with skill, confidence and nothing to lose. They would rather have young men be emasculated, demoralized and consumed by self-loathing, too weak to mount any effective resistance.
What about the sheer number of women in power, all acting to advance women's position in society?
Except if they were happy with the system, they wouldn't want to destroy it. It doesn't make sense to say that they want young men to be kicked down by the system because they won't resist, because nobody would resist a system that's working for them either - there has to be some level of sadism in why they are targeted so openly and obviously, and if you think about it long enough, you can't land on anyone other than women who would find that enjoyable to inflict on people.
First of all, yes it does. Secondly, I never said I believe it will actually work. Men have proven to be more resilient, and more willing to fight for their freedom, than I think the social engineering aficionados were prepared for.