I'm new to the ant-SJW community and I am confused by why many Soyboys are typically associated with the Nintendo Switch Ninendo doesn't appear to be pro-Social Justice and, unlike Sony, generally keeps out of politics. What are your thoughts on the console and why is it associated with SoyBoys?
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (49)
sorted by:
I think part of it is based off the fact that these soycucks are emotionally stunted people. They are emotionally, psychologically, and developmentally children due to the conditioning and abuse of the Social Justice Racket. Not too different from how a child who is sexually assaulted or raped as a child has a significantly stunted psychological or sexual development from the rape.
They all end up having a horrible kind of "Peter Pan" syndrome where they really need to learn how to grow up, but never have, and are actually conditioned not to. This infantilization can express itself in a whole litany of deviant or pathological behaviors, but a pretty common one is to obsess over youth and childhood.
While Nintendo platform games aren't strictly for children, Nintendo heavily leans into franchises aimed at children and tweens (Zelda, Mario, Starfox, etc). This is where the soyboys tend to demonstrate emotional incontinence as a replacement for "child-like wonder". This is why they virtue-signal the over-exaggerated "soyface".
I would also argue that these same soyboys and SJWs have had such a stunted development that they actually haven't necessarily learned all the basic emotional and psychological lessons towards growing up and socialization that childhood cartoons and figures are primarily designed for. If they are exposed to basic developmental lessons in "Children's Programming" that they have never learned, it can be quite useful and important for them. This is why they might try to focus on it: because they might subconsciously understand that they missed some developmental step.
It's true. Games are a very important part of life, they are a safe "training ground" for people to hone their skills before they need to apply them seriously. In terms of sports they can act as competitions without violence, so people can still end up feeling victory and defeat. This is where the "games are just for kids" mindset comes from.
A person who's 20 years old and still riding a bike with training wheels is a failure.
That's why it's an insult for people to be saying "all video games should have an easy mode!" because they are basically saying "all bikes should have training wheels" which is nonsensical.
You can see people's obsession with young adult literature and superhero movies as similar symptoms of arrested development.
Agreed, but I think part of the problem here is that this isn't an accident. Take a more extreme example: if you saw a 13 year old boy that talked like a toddler and wore diapers, you could say a few things:
You could say that he was stupid and didn't learn how to be potty-trained. Maybe, but at 13, the kid would have to be significantly mentally disabled. If he seems like a coherent 13 year old, something worse has happened.
You could say that his parents failed him, and didn't teach him right. But that wouldn't make sense either. Again, at 13, he would be ashamed to not be potty-trained, he would never be able to be with friends, he would even realize something was wrong by himself. He would probably have gotten infections. His neurological development alone would compel him to find a way out of his untenable situation.
But what you should say, and what you should recognize when his mother says, "My precious baby boy is perfect" is that the child is being horrifically abused. The child is being manipulated into acting like a baby in order to satisfy the needs and desires of his parents.
My contention is that they soy-boys are not simple failures, you can't accidentally generate that many developmental failures in a natural system. No, they are abused. They are conditioned. This is something that has been done to them by a form of institutional conditioning that has infantalized them, for the profit of those institutions. The narcissism that they are taught is meant to counter the perpetual feeling of inadequacy, failure, and oppression they genuinely feel from their institutionalized abuse. But their abusers have weaponized that agitation and inadequacy as something to deliver upon their enemies. Not too dissimilar from a cop who removes a child from an abusive family, and is bitten by the kid who is protesting being taken away from the thing that he has been taught is the only person in the world that would protect or love him at all.
It's not just that they are failures. It's that there are people and things that wanted them to be failures, and then made them into failures.
I've noticed that a lot of boys with single mother homes are treated as "the man" of the household. They're both a child and an adult friend to the single parent so the childhood habits just blend into the adult habits and it appears normal to them.
I'm not OP but that could be considered a different type of condidtioning, maybe even the reverse type as the one previously stated. Acting "grown up" from a young age usually signifies a environment where the child was told and given responsibilities that some his peers wouldn't experience until later in life, like possibly working at a family business or raising his younger siblings. Sometimes this maybe due to a single-parent household and poverty, but it may also be due to parental abuse, with the mother thinking it's the child's job to grow up, maybe giving them difficult or impossible tasks and then berating the child for not doing them perfectly. The parent gives the child too much agency for their actions; when you're smal land weak and relatively unskilled, you can't do that much. Soyboy conditioning I think is somewhat the opposite. It's often the symptom of helicopter parenting, where the mother does EVERYTHING for the child to a manic level. The mother gives them NO agency, so they continually act like a child. If you never have to cook for yourself, then you never learn to, and you become 30-year-old virgin who can button mash like a pro but can barely make a bowl of Mac and Cheese.
Yes, that would be a very bad substitution.
To be fair, it's important not to underestimate the degree to which the soy contingent simply overlaps with general purpose hipsters as well, congregating to Nintendo simply because of it's cultural relevance and perceived ease of access.
I always thought they flocked to Nintendo because it's well known and even your average games journalist can play Animal Crossing or Mario so they can say "Yeah I'm a gamer",
Fair enough. The mass conformist culture of the Social Justice Racket will virtue signal for easy status gains.