Sfdebris.net

Given their ultimate conclusions, I thought it appropriate to post here.


youtu.be/fuFlMtZmvY0

A while ago I did ask this, when I looked up something and saw that Snow White movie being bashed for what the lead actress said... and a couple guys said they wanted to 'violate her' to put her in her place. This was, of course, not new. What was new... was the hundreds of likes they got. Years ago, they woulda been blasted, and while some did jeer at them, those people were the ones shouted down. This was not some super hate site... it was a YouTube comment section. Looking back at a lot of things... it feels like the past year, the internet community has gotten nastier and nastier and it's really hard to fathom.

Nobody700 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2023 3:52 am A while ago I did ask this, when I looked up something and saw that Snow White movie being bashed for what the lead actress said... and a couple guys said they wanted to 'violate her' to put her in her place. This was, of course, not new. What was new... was the hundreds of likes they got. Years ago, they woulda been blasted, and while some did jeer at them, those people were the ones shouted down. This was not some super hate site... it was a YouTube comment section. Looking back at a lot of things... it feels like the past year, the internet community has gotten nastier and nastier and it's really hard to fathom.

I'll give you my two cents for what its worth: the problem is men like Andrew Tate poisoning the well. You may think from some of my comments on here that I may be a Tate fan and that is understandable, but you will just have to take my word for it that I think he is a grifter and a con man who has managed to find a very profitable niche. But the thing we have to remember here is that Tate didn't just appear out of thin air one day and suddenly he had a hundred million fans. He merely built upon what was already there. And if he vanished tomorrow there will be another to take his place.

The question here of course is, what was already there? Well that is very simple: anyone born after 2005 has literally spent their entire life on the internet. Every single day (potentially) they have had conspiracy theories and filth pumped into their brains by men with silver tongues. Hate begets hate and now that hate can be beamed directly into your child's bedroom. Brainwashing a normal person into hate is not difficult either, ask the people of Germany in the 1930s. And this is compounded by the fact that the INCEL phenomenon is a very real thing all of the way across the planet and varies from men who cannot get laid to men who have completely withdrawn from society. The Japanese even have a word for the latter: hikikomori. Their numbers are large and growing rapidly and it is a big issue. Anger leads to hate and always has. And a lot of these guys are VERY angry at women and their peers in general for ignoring them.

I agree with you in general but I think you're underestimating how old that particular problem is. Tate especially is just ripping off Tyler Durden's schtick from Fight Club, and that was a pastiche of talking points the author thought were already cliche in the 90s. The mythopoetics (the guys who coined the term 'toxic masculinity' as opposed to the healthy masculinity they were trying to encourage) were doing forrest drum circles and such to try to combat it in the 80s.

The internet and the increased isolation everyone lives in and algorithm rabbit holes it brings sure aren't helping, but it's exacerbating a problem that was already there.

On the actual video: I thought this was weirdly naive. It doesn't account for people being fed deliberate misinformation or just being wrong at all. If I think my team is best and they think their team is best like the video says that's one thing, but if I think my team should be allowed to play and they think they HAVE to back their team and kick my team and everyone who likes my team out of the game because someone sold them the lie that my team will do horrible things to their children otherwise... well then we have a very different situation.

hammerofglass wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2023 10:39 am On the actual video: I thought this was weirdly naive. It doesn't account for people being fed deliberate misinformation or just being wrong at all. If I think my team is best and they think their team is best like the video says that's one thing, but if I think my team should be allowed to play and they think they HAVE to back their team and kick my team and everyone who likes my team out of the game because someone sold them the lie that my team will do horrible things to their children otherwise... well then we have a very different situation.

Does the video consider stirring shit for the sake of engagement by paid actors, trolls and propaganda-/psyops-purposes?

Madner Kami wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2023 12:35 pm

hammerofglass wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2023 10:39 am On the actual video: I thought this was weirdly naive. It doesn't account for people being fed deliberate misinformation or just being wrong at all. If I think my team is best and they think their team is best like the video says that's one thing, but if I think my team should be allowed to play and they think they HAVE to back their team and kick my team and everyone who likes my team out of the game because someone sold them the lie that my team will do horrible things to their children otherwise... well then we have a very different situation.

Does the video consider stirring shit for the sake of engagement by paid actors, trolls and propaganda-/psyops-purposes?

It's only ten minutes to watch it yourself but no not at all. It assumes complete good faith by all parties. Like I said, weirdly naïve.

hammerofglass wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2023 6:31 pm It assumes complete good faith by all parties. Like I said, weirdly naïve.

You're not wrong, but I think it's important to note that this video is specifically talking about the results of some recent studies and is solely talking about those findings. It's not meant to be a wider analysis. That does leave a lot out by omission, but only because it's focused on debunking a specific myth.

hammerofglass wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2023 9:31 amripping off Tyler Durden's schtick from Fight Club

By someone who never read the book and completely missed the point of the film. Sadly, that describes a large portion of its fandom.

pilight wrote: ↑Fri Dec 29, 2023 3:41 am

hammerofglass wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2023 9:31 amripping off Tyler Durden's schtick from Fight Club

By someone who never read the book and completely missed the point of the film. Sadly, that describes a large portion of its fandom.

Listening to the audio commentary track for the film, I was disappointed to learn even the filmmakers seemed to have entirely missed the point somehow.