• 0 Posts
  • 19 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
Cake day: January 25th, 2024
  • GhostFence@lemmy.worldtoProgrammer Humor@lemmy.ml•Alpha Male v0.00003
    1·
    10 months ago

    We need to use another word besides Alpha. The division that the word “alpha” is associated with is the division between men who are desired by women and men who are not. If you’re using the controversial word “alpha” that is what you are talking about. It’s like classifying the rich vs the poor. Lemmy users don’t want to accept this but most heterosexual men want to be the former in either case, no one wants to be the latter.

  • GhostFence@lemmy.worldtoProgrammer Humor@lemmy.ml•Alpha Male v0.00003
    313·
    10 months ago

    Too bad the term “Alpha” males has gotten such a bad rap from cretins like Andrew Tate.

    The term “Alpha male” refers to men with a mix of being tall, very good looks, charisma, authority, and social popularity. I think we can all agree that men with a high level of those traits are very popular with heterosexual, or have we fallen so far that most people don’t see that?

    To put it more simply, all the men on Lemmy combined will not have as many women lusting for them as Jason Momoa or one of those Kpop dudes. Don’t call it Alpha Male if you want, because the term has been tarnished by hucketers. But we all know the type of man that has zero trouble attracting women.

  • GhostFence@lemmy.worldtoToday I Learned@lemmy.world•TIL about Earl Silverman, a domestic abuse survivor who founded a shelter for men. It was denied funding from the government and he was ridiculed. The shelter went bankrupt and he died by suicideEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    There is a problem here that your post is making obvious, but no one is seeing. Every form of discrimination against men is being described by feminists as “patriarchy.” It seems when all you have is a hammer, everything in front of you becomes a nail. The giant blowback feminism is getting is because of this one-word-fits-all aspect of their ideology. In this case, the dangerously deluded idea that if you just get rid of Patriarchy, male disposability will just go away and so will discrimination against men.

    It won’t, because the common denominator is humans.

    This is why you never hear feminists talk about the actual things that drive women to attack men without provocation. If they can’t pin it on the Patriarchy they don’t want to discuss it. Literally this excuses women from being held responsible for their actions… because when a woman does something like that, it’s just her, but when a man does it, it’s reflective of a bigger problem, aka “men as a class”. Women don’t have bigger influences that make them think they can get away with stuff unless you can blame it on the Patriarchy and not the simple fact that women can be just as evil as men and in fact can circle their wagons around an offender just like the Patriarchy can for miscreant men. Just look at how Sharon Osbourne and an entire crowd of women circled their wagons around Catherine Kieu. I can provide the video if you want. But that never matters to feminists - the idea that women have their own framework outside of “Patriarchy” by which they treat each other and men wrong is heresy to them. Patriarchy as the cause of all gender wrongs is as myopic as it is popular.

    Yet it’s hard to even discuss this because talking about it draws the equally fascist elements of the men’s rights movement. And so myopia becomes the new 20/20.