Toxic masculinity and red pilling boys and young men

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 211
  • Views: 4K
  • Politics 
Paine said:
I’m still not seeing a compelling reason why any of that would push men across the globe towards the type of content we are talking about here.
Click to expand...
We should also mention hip-hop, which absolutely is global and also full of sexism and misogyny (not all of it, of course).

I admire hip-hop. I'm not a huge fan; I dig Public Enemy and Rakim and the occasional De La Soul, but I can't listen to it for a long time without getting bored. But how can you not respect what it represents? Punk often gets credit for being DIY, but hip-hop was even more so. Rock, which was originally black, was becoming super-white by the 1970s. Motown had hit the mainstream, but that was the primary opportunity for black artists and it's not infinitely deep. There was also funk, but by the end of the 1970s, funk had developed big barriers to entry. Not every Kool kid had a Gang, and trying to compete with P-Funk was just impossible. So the early rappers took those funk beats and riffs, and put something different on top. It's marvelous and a testament to artistic spirit.

But we can't ignore the gender assumptions and roles built into the genre. Explaining that is for another thread. I think it's fair to say, though, that hip-hop has amplified certain types of messages in ways that were not possible two generations ago.
 
superrific said:
We should also mention hip-hop, which absolutely is global and also full of sexism and misogyny (not all of it, of course).

I admire hip-hop. I'm not a huge fan; I dig Public Enemy and Rakim and the occasional De La Soul, but I can't listen to it for a long time without getting bored. But how can you not respect what it represents? Punk often gets credit for being DIY, but hip-hop was even more so. Rock, which was originally black, was becoming super-white by the 1970s. Motown had hit the mainstream, but that was the primary opportunity for black artists and it's not infinitely deep. There was also funk, but by the end of the 1970s, funk had developed big barriers to entry. Not every Kool kid had a Gang, and trying to compete with P-Funk was just impossible. So the early rappers took those funk beats and riffs, and put something different on top. It's marvelous and a testament to artistic spirit.

But we can't ignore the gender assumptions and roles built into the genre. Explaining that is for another thread. I think it's fair to say, though, that hip-hop has amplified certain types of messages in ways that were not possible two generations ago.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I guess it’s also all these violent video games too. Come on man.
 
Paine said:
I think you make the same assumptions about all Trump voters being MAGA as you make about all redpilled young men being worried primarily about performance in bed.

Is there a segment of Trump voters that are going to vote for him purely based on the hate and anger that he espouses? Yes, absolutely. That being said, in 2016 and 2020, we know for a fact that not everyone that voted for Trump subscribed to this worldview. We’re seeing it in this election with low information voters who say their primary concern is the economy.
Click to expand...
1. This is a message board. We always talk in generalities. I'm not going to make any assumptions about "all Trump voters" or red-pilled young men. But unless our posts are going to become academic papers, we talk about large groups of people in general.

2. Further, I wasn't even talking about Trump voters being MAGA. Rather, I was focusing on the MAGA part of Trump's support. In general, I'm more concerned about MAGA than low-information voters on the margins. The latter are of intensely more interest to political campaigns, as they should be in the electoral college farce we call a democracy, but MAGA drives the coalition. The non-MAGA Trump voters basically ignore the MAGA part.

3. Just because people say their primary concern is the economy, doesn't make it so. Overwhelmingly Trump support in a given area is predicted by the amount of racial diversity, and in particular, the derivative of that diversity. Diversifying areas have become huge basins of MAGA disaffection. Not because people are broke, but because they don't like what they are seeing.

And one piece of evidence on the disingenuity of the "it's the economy" BS is their attitudes toward the economy right now. As many, many people have pointed out, MAGAs sure don't act like they are strapped for resources. The economy doesn't look terrible. People are generally happy with their own financial situation. To the extent that people are dissatisfied with the economy, it's in large measure a projection of assumptions onto other people. And boy isn't that an easy way to disguise other sentiments that are more noxious. MAGAs almost entirely complain about things that are far away from them: the border, and the distant economy -- and oh, migrants taking over small towns, which has the advantage of being largely unobservable. The problem with the Springfield narrative is that they named the place. It boomeranged because the lies could be easily detected.
 
Paine said:
Yeah, I guess it’s also all these violent video games too. Come on man.
Click to expand...
Come on, how? Attitudes aren't formed by culture? That's strange. Do you also think the same thing about minstrel shows? Were they entirely epiphenomenal, or did they have the effect of transmitting stereotypes about black people that, when consumed, tended to reinforce prevalent attitudes about race?

I don't know how someone could a) think that Hollywood depictions of black people were harmful; and b) not think that the depiction of women in hip-hop is not harmful. Maybe you think the former is also epiphenomenal? That it doesn't really matter when there's an amazing action movie happening at the top of a huge office building while a black guy named Argyle is chilling in his limo in the basement? And Die Hard even gets a little credit for making the baddies' tech wiz a black guy (I don't know if I had seen that before).
 
superrific said:
1. This is a message board. We always talk in generalities. I'm not going to make any assumptions about "all Trump voters" or red-pilled young men. But unless our posts are going to become academic papers, we talk about large groups of people in general.

2. Further, I wasn't even talking about Trump voters being MAGA. Rather, I was focusing on the MAGA part of Trump's support. In general, I'm more concerned about MAGA than low-information voters on the margins. The latter are of intensely more interest to political campaigns, as they should be in the electoral college farce we call a democracy, but MAGA drives the coalition. The non-MAGA Trump voters basically ignore the MAGA part.

3. Just because people say their primary concern is the economy, doesn't make it so. Overwhelmingly Trump support in a given area is predicted by the amount of racial diversity, and in particular, the derivative of that diversity. Diversifying areas have become huge basins of MAGA disaffection. Not because people are broke, but because they don't like what they are seeing.

And one piece of evidence on the disingenuity of the "it's the economy" BS is their attitudes toward the economy right now. As many, many people have pointed out, MAGAs sure don't act like they are strapped for resources. The economy doesn't look terrible. People are generally happy with their own financial situation. To the extent that people are dissatisfied with the economy, it's in large measure a projection of assumptions onto other people. And boy isn't that an easy way to disguise other sentiments that are more noxious. MAGAs almost entirely complain about things that are far away from them: the border, and the distant economy -- and oh, migrants taking over small towns, which has the advantage of being largely unobservable. The problem with the Springfield narrative is that they named the place. It boomeranged because the lies could be easily detected.
Click to expand...
Just because macroeconomic factors look good doesn’t mean people aren’t struggling. Rent is fucking expensive and price increases are outpacing wage growth. I think it’s arrogant to say that people aren’t really concerned about the economy.

How do you explain Trump’s growing appeal to Hispanics and Black men without the financial piece?
 
Those are two of the groups that have a strong aggressive male image and strongly threatened by the move toward equality. I didn't bother to look but you might see that move with Muslim males.
 
finesse said:
Those are two of the groups that have a strong aggressive male image and strongly threatened by the move toward equality. I didn't bother to look but you might see that move with Muslim males.
Click to expand...
Which gets us back to the need for different kinds of male role models and what it means to be masculine.
 
Paine said:
Just because macroeconomic factors look good doesn’t mean people aren’t struggling. Rent is fucking expensive and price increases are outpacing wage growth. I think it’s arrogant to say that people aren’t really concerned about the economy.

How do you explain Trump’s growing appeal to Hispanics and Black men without the financial piece?
Click to expand...
Non-college black men are notoriously unsupportive of gay rights. Hispanics as well, to a lesser extent. We've been experiencing a nationwide gay panic. Connect the dots.

Economic opportunities aren't worse for young black men today than they were 15 years ago. But they weren't out there voting for Romney or Bush. Trump did better even in 2016 with black men than any Republican candidate for quite some time, IIRC. He was also running against a woman. Hmm.
 
Paine said:
I fail to see what that has to do with male role models.
Click to expand...
You fail to see what hip-hop has to do with male role models? This is becoming a strange jumping-the-shark moment.

Other than family members, entertainers (including athletes) have long been primary role models for young people. I mean, this is so obvious a point that I'm baffled as to why I am having to assert it.
 
superrific said:
You fail to see what hip-hop has to do with male role models? This is becoming a strange jumping-the-shark moment.

Other than family members, entertainers (including athletes) have long been primary role models for young people. I mean, this is so obvious a point that I'm baffled as to why I am having to assert it.
Click to expand...
It depends on whether you think culture drives who becomes popular figures or vice versa. I’m more inclined to think that the culture causes figures to emerge who align with that culture. Not that male rappers are driving the toxic masculinity imbedded within the culture.

It’s pretty easy to figure out which came first in this chicken/egg situation.
 
Paine said:
It depends on whether you think culture drives who becomes popular figures or vice versa. I’m more inclined to think that the culture causes figures to emerge who align with that culture. Not that male rappers are driving the toxic masculinity imbedded within the culture.

It’s pretty easy to figure out which came first in this chicken/egg situation.
Click to expand...
Sigh. First, it's not pretty easy to figure that out. More importantly, though, it's a feedback loop. Let's suppose you're right about the chicken and the egg. Fine, but today's chickens are still laying eggs, you know?

I'm not going to have this argument. I find your position mind-boggling and contradicted by, well, everything about our culture. I'll just say that if your position is correct, we don't have to worry about Andrew Tate or Jordan Peterson. They are just symptoms.
 
superrific said:
We should also mention hip-hop, which absolutely is global and also full of sexism and misogyny (not all of it, of course).

I admire hip-hop. I'm not a huge fan; I dig Public Enemy and Rakim and the occasional De La Soul, but I can't listen to it for a long time without getting bored. But how can you not respect what it represents? Punk often gets credit for being DIY, but hip-hop was even more so. Rock, which was originally black, was becoming super-white by the 1970s. Motown had hit the mainstream, but that was the primary opportunity for black artists and it's not infinitely deep. There was also funk, but by the end of the 1970s, funk had developed big barriers to entry. Not every Kool kid had a Gang, and trying to compete with P-Funk was just impossible. So the early rappers took those funk beats and riffs, and put something different on top. It's marvelous and a testament to artistic spirit.

But we can't ignore the gender assumptions and roles built into the genre. Explaining that is for another thread. I think it's fair to say, though, that hip-hop has amplified certain types of messages in ways that were not possible two generations ago.
Click to expand...
I was not going to post this video in the covers thread due to how wildly problematic it is, but it sure checks a lot of boxes in this thread.

Punk? Check.
Hip-hop? Check.
Gender Assumptions? Check.
Misogyny and Toxic Masculinity. Check - but with the caveat this is early enough in the cycle where it was still OK to show some level of vulnerability in your disaffection. Showing any sign of vulnerability is verboten in today's toxic masculinity circles.
Gaming culture? Check.
Racism? Check.
Soy Boy Trope? Check.

Released a solid decade ago. I think it could be taught in a seminar on the origins of toxic masculinity.

Lot going on in this video [NSFW - lotta F-bombs]...
 
Ddseddse said:
I was not going to post this video in the covers thread due to how wildly problematic it is, but it sure checks a lot of boxes in this thread.

Punk? Check.
Hip-hop? Check.
Gender Assumptions? Check.
Misogyny and Toxic Masculinity. Check - but with the caveat this is early enough in the cycle where it was still OK to show some level of vulnerability in your disaffection. Showing any sign of vulnerability is verboten in today's toxic masculinity circles.
Gaming culture? Check.
Racism? Check.
Soy Boy Trope? Check.

Released a solid decade ago. I think it could be taught in a seminar on toxic masculinity.

Lot going on in this video [NSFW - lotta F-bombs]...
Click to expand...

Oh, man, I love that track. Do you know the history? It's a cover of an old Suicidal Tendencies song. The whole point is that the narrator is fucking crazy, hence the title institutionalized. I don't know if that message comes across to everyone, but that's the backstory. The anecdotes told in this song mirror the ones told in the original.

I suppose you could say that the humor is punching down, but I don't think that's the spirit of the song. It's ironic. The narrator is complaining that he is seen as crazy, when actually it's everyone else who is crazy -- but actually, actually, it's him.
 
superrific said:
Oh, man, I love that track. Do you know the history? It's a cover of an old Suicidal Tendencies song. The whole point is that the narrator is fucking crazy, hence the title institutionalized. I don't know if that message comes across to everyone, but that's the backstory. The anecdotes told in this song mirror the ones told in the original.

I suppose you could say that the humor is punching down, but I don't think that's the spirit of the song. It's ironic. The narrator is complaining that he is seen as crazy, when actually it's everyone else who is crazy -- but actually, actually, it's him.
Click to expand...
I saw Suicidal Tendencies do it live in 86 at the Eutah Clubhouse in Baltimore. I was black and blue for days. I regularly hung out at the Eutah Clubhouse and have the tinnitus to prove it.

I am 100% with you regarding the message of the song (even in this version), but we're also dealing with the Dave Chappelle problem, It's not how the message is intended. It's how it is received.

I too, love that song. And musically speaking, the version I posted is phenomenal. The lyrics and video are, however, objectively problematic, sadly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top