A full ass generation of young media consumers has never known a world where news outlets’ default approach to covering every topic was not using a “Person In Power Says ____” template
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
Thank you. I don’t want my news filtered through the greedy feeble minds of these ignorant billionaires. Just because someone rich said it does not make it worth my time.
I’d settle for even the minor return to headlines like this, where the dumb things were put in quotes, which gave distance to them (and bonus of implied derision)
The fact that Zuck feels comfortable speaking on masculinity is more insulting to men than anything I (or any feminist) have said about the demographic.
I think a lot of men and even more women realize that men who talk about masculinity all the time do it as an attempt to over compensate. So, they just see it as a sign of weakness.
I do wish there was a place or process for having a healthy conversation about masculinity. I think restoring it to a helpful concept is a worthy goal.
Warren, you want to have the conversation? Start the conversation. Not a "throw down." An honest thought. Too often, people get the idea that "someone" should do something. You are someone, and this might actually be a place to have the conversation.
I certainly think conversations about helpful and not helpful concepts of masculinity are needed. But better phrasing might be healthy and/or pro-social concepts masculinity. Don't think I would be using the word "restoring" in that context.
Also, language is important. If your point is that there needs to discussions about what qualities are exclusively helpful for males to have, but not females, the answer is- No there doesn't. If a quality is helpful for male, wouldn't it be helpful for just "people" in general.
Sorry you read that as talking about you. I thought I was making it pretty obvious I was speaking only about what I thought by using phrases like, "I think" and "I don't think" But at this point I am thinking there might be reasons you are having trouble finding places to have conversations.
No matter how much of his fortune he’s spending on gender affirming care, he has less “masculine energy” than my mother. But in his defense, she was one tough woman.
I’m sorry what? What percentage of companies and governments are run by men? Given the shitshow the world has become, I counter his point by stating we need more feminine energy. Not Marge, Mace, etc. though because they’re nuts.
Have we forgotten who Zuckerberg is and was? He was the incel precursor who developed a way to rate women on their looks. That’s who he was, and still is. All the men who’ve never moved past feeling unwanted or disrespected, and they’re wreaking revenge on the world.
Totally true. They just act as a megaphone for the rich and powerful. Everyone talks about “fact checks”. Maybe they should do their own independent reporting instead and tell stories the old fashioned way. A quote can be built in. But it provides more context and reporter can craft the story.
The fact that we’re not mercilessly clowning this poseur for completely transforming his presented style into that of a teen boy’s is wild. Alpaca hair, oversized t-shirt and a gold chain? When you used to wear button downs and khakis for the first 40 years of your life?!
This just proves, he never stopped being the little jerk who decided that rating the attractiveness of his female classmates at Harvard was what he was going to do with his time on the Internet Mark Zuckerberg has always been a miserable little worm of a person. He just used to hide it better.
I’m pretty sure he wasn’t displaying much “masculine energy” when he sort of stole the Winkelvoss twins idea and sat in a chair coding for weeks on end
Comments
Him and musk have zero clue.
Super weird every story now has a billionaire filter on it!
This is the 'masculine energy' he's talking about.
The super rich have not only turbocharged their wealth over the last decade, they’ve also got ever closer to having a direct say on policy.
None of them give a sh!t about you, it’s all about them. This is why there should be a boycott, to send a very clear message.
Why do you think the GOP wants to get rid of Wikipedia again?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Analytica.