One of the parts I found interesting was when they, and Sargon commenting, were talking about how the bad economy affects everyone, men and women, and yet women are filled with much more resentment and radicalized hatred about it. Now we know that women are actually affected less by the bad economy, due to them having more jobs, higher paying jobs, more training spots, more government programs available to them, and the option to always get some male sucker to pay for them by pretending to be interested.
But assume that men and women are both affected equally by bad times (though we know that isn't true). Women still react to it with more vitriol and seething rage then men. And I speculate that goes all the way back to how girls are raised by White men pretty much everywhere. Fathers love treating their daughters like princesses. Girls learn from a very young age the tears at the right time, a smile at the right time, gets them their way. Men are seemingly biologically driven to be much easier on their daughters than their sons. Women learn about the 'girl bonus' as they form sapience, and it becomes internalized around the same time they're learning to walk and talk.
Girls learn to expect easy mode and for someone to wipe their tears and solve any problem for them from birth, and they grow up expecting this is the nature of the universe. So when they finally get even a whiff of actual hard times, it's a much harder slap in the face to them. Boys on the other hand tend to learn to suck it up and deal with when faced with any adversity, so when they get old and life hands them Shit Sandwich #9,267, they are more likely to once again suck it up and deal with it.
I was watching a Dank video from maybe a month ago, and I remember a part where he went off on a tangent about how children need to be disciplined and need to be smacked around a bit when they misbehave and need to learn to deal with consequences and so on. But even Dankula then said something along the lines of 'But not my girls though. My daughters, I just can't do it. My boys, sure. But my girls, nah. When they look up at me, I just can't'.
It just struck me as a moment of "even Count Dankula, who tends to be pretty hard boiled on most things, still has that instinctual 'I have to shield my daughters from all adversity even when I know it's unhealthy for them in the long term." reaction. I'm not sure it's something we know how to fix or even if it can be. That feeling seems to be genetic, and I have no idea how our great great grandparents were able to keep a lid on it enough to raise daughters to not be spoiled brats who demand everything simply because they exist. Even the most 'based' right wing dads of today seem totally unable to do it.
One of the parts I found interesting was when they, and Sargon commenting, were talking about how the bad economy affects everyone, men and women, and yet women are filled with much more resentment and radicalized hatred about it. Now we know that women are actually affected less by the bad economy, due to them having more jobs, higher paying jobs, more training spots, more government programs available to them, and the option to always get some male sucker to pay for them by pretending to be interested.
But assume that men and women are both affected equally by bad times (though we know that isn't true). Women still react to it with more vitriol and seething rage then men. And I speculate that goes all the way back to how girls are raised by White men pretty much everywhere. Fathers love treating their daughters like princesses. Girls learn from a very young age the tears at the right time, a smile at the right time, gets them their way. Men are seemingly biologically driven to be much easier on their daughters than their sons. Women learn about the 'girl bonus' as they form sapience, and it becomes internalized around the same time they're learning to walk and talk.
Girls learn to expect easy mode and for someone to wipe their tears and solve any problem for them from birth, and they grow up expecting this is the nature of the universe. So when they finally get even a whiff of actual hard times, it's a much harder slap in the face to them. Boys on the other hand tend to learn to suck it up and deal with when faced with any adversity, so when they get old and life hands them Shit Sandwich #9,267, they are more likely to once again suck it up and deal with it.
I was watching a Dank video from maybe a month ago, and I remember a part where he went off on a tangent about how children need to be disciplined and need to be smacked around a bit when they misbehave and need to learn to deal with consequences and so on. But even Dankula then said something along the lines of 'But not my girls though. My daughters, I just can't do it. My boys, sure. But my girls, nah. When they look up at me, I just can't'.
It just struck me as a moment of "even Count Dankula, who tends to be pretty hard boiled on most things, still has that instinctual 'I have to shield my daughters from all adversity even when I know it's unhealthy for them in the long term." reaction. I'm not sure it's something we know how to fix or even if it can be. That feeling seems to be genetic, and I have no idea how our great great grandparents were able to keep a lid on it enough to raise daughters to not be spoiled brats who demand everything simply because they exist. Even the most 'based' right wing dads of today seem totally unable to do it.