/edu/ - Education

>>7419
Maybe some of what that guy says could be useful, but the first thing that has to be done is removing all the identities like "man". Because being an identity means doing nothing.

>>7420
Based Mark Manson enjoyer

Okay so you are consumer masculine then. I was hoping there was there was more to you but nah this confirms what I expected you were on about.

>>7436
>Throwing shit a wall to see what sticks
You will never be a real man, at least not until you give up your existential faggotry.

>>7437
You self immolate and consume that which bourgeois tradition tells you to, and bark at anyone that thinks for themselves.
I remember man to be the thinking beast. You aren't a man, you are domesticated, chained to you suburban life of fearing the inevitable deterioration your material conditions destine you to. You are aware it is poison but you are too comfortable to leave, so you drunkenly limp around a gym exerting yourself to create nothing but a body you don't deserve, while refusing to live a life that wouldn't accumulate that fat in the first place elsewhere.
>You will never be a real man, at least not until you give up your existential faggotry.
I am a lesbian and a factory worker. I have a fulfilling life that affords me time to think about higher things. I did have a good laugh the first time I read this book though, even if it's a bit of a tired meme. Jack was serious about all of that.

>>7438
You read this whole book which didn't like (but have nothing concrete or aepcific to say about) in a day.

Sounds like something that really happened.

Being a man in a dress who creeps on women on Bumble doesn't make you a lesbian fyi

>>7439
>the first time I read this (past tense)
<in a day
This book came out 2012
>screeches about trans people the moment he spots a woman
>bumble
>looks that up
>it's a dating app
lmao you really are a suburbanite, can't even leave your couch for pussy.

>>7440
>book came out in 2012
You've still said nothing concrete about it. Meaningless phrases about consumerism – but when the book literally has nothing to do with buying anything to prove manhood. The critique doesn't even match the book in the slightest. If it were talking about cars or dressing a certain manly way (or anything to do with style, fashion, worldly possessions, etc), I might be about the give you the benefit of the doubt…. But it doesn't. More likely - and fitting with the overall theme of the past few days on this board (i.e., leftists always lie) - you're simply talking out of your ass, hoping to approximate what you believe an intelligent person would sound like.

>I read this book a long time ago
Lol, sure you did
What are the actually chances that a leftist - a supposed lesbian factory worker nonetheless - read a book that is obscure even among right wing and manopshere circles
>pretends they don't know what bumble is
Lol ok
>I'm a lesbian!!
Sure bud. You're a real woman. We all believe you about that too
>Screeches about shallow 'consumer' interpretations of masculinity. Falls back to the old canard about incels to try to take a swipe.
Lol, the left really is pathetic. This was definitely womanly type of remark, even though your not a woman.
<Comrade Dunning Kruger…. Is that you? Stop pretending to be something you're not:
>competent, a woman, a revolutionary, an intellectual, etc.
<You are a tumblr faggot (see pic related here >>7436 ) who somehow made it to 2023 without roping yourself. The worse part is you projecting your own lack of sexual options onto others. Good luck with the whole lesbian larp ig

>>7438
>>7441
Both of you failed to realize this book is blatant satire.

>>7441
Gonna be real with you, I read it in 2014 and all I remember is that it's funny. Cheers for the pdf tho. It does prime the reader to consoom tho.
>you're simply talking out of your ass
yes, the topic of masculinity and femininity are non-serious topics.
>hoping to approximate what you believe an intelligent person would sound like.
<How dare you make fun of me above my reading level
cope
>pretends they don't know what bumble is
Why would anyone know what that is? Dating sites have always been a scam. At least say something with media relevance like the one where you swipe left or right. Buy an ad.
>Sure bud. You're a real woman.
Post dick
>Lol, the left really is pathetic.
So you're not even a leftist, just some /mlpol/ spillover. No wonder you have no shame in being a pet.
>tumblr bad
yes but it has rss feeds and I mildly enjoy the watching mess unfold.

>>7443
>Woman
>RSS feed
Lol ok Comrade DK

>>7443 (me)
>like the one where you swipe left or right.
Tinder, that was the one. Was hoping that would be the last one since it boiled down the concept to it's to it's bare essentials. You'd think that would disllusion people.

>>7464
>You'd think that would disllusion people.
Tinder told men there's women inside your phone.
Tinder told women there's validation inside your phone.

People didn't really care about the interface, that was just hoops to jump through.

>>7465
>Tinder told women there's validation inside your phone.
That seems like the most plausible explaination why a woman would touch something like that. I feel like we have more highly tuned predator sensors in our brains, so even back in highschool the Tinder sounded like a speedrun to getiing raped or waking up with a few sellable organs missing. If you're just on there to have people tell you you're pretty and not actually go to the appointment, that seems more reasonable.

>>7466
>I feel like we have more highly tuned predator sensors in our brains
Now you are stereotyping women, and it's weird to reference a universal "we" as if all women were members of the same club. Anyway women can engage in predatory behavior also.

>Tinder sounded like a speedrun to getiing raped or waking up with a few sellable organs missing
Risky ? yes.
A front for a organ-harvesting ring, i doubt it.

>>7467
My reasoning is the same reason women have an in-built ability to see more shades of orange and red to spot berries and stuff. Dimorpism was more prominent to survival at one point to men being able to defend / hunt while women gather, strategize and sound the alarm was a strat when people were still barely making a living. If you have something to refute that then I'll conceed as I don't feel strongly about this.
>A front for a organ-harvesting ring, i doubt it.
Not like that. It's like if they made craigslist but for dating. I got the desk I'm using rn off craigslist, it's sturdy and the guy I bought it from was pretty chill. You're still gambling your kidney each time you use it tho, and dating being a touchy-kissy thing seems even more so.

>>7468
Sexual dimophism means that male predators and female predators are statistically likely to use different strategies. For example men are more likely to use intimidation while women are more likely to use deception. But it does not mean that men are predators and women are prey.

Sexed color perception being the result of hunter gatherer division of labor, certainly makes for a compelling story, but have you checked it ? The bare minimum would be looking for research that confirms or refutes that women are in fact better at spotting nuts and berries.

It's plausible that in primitive society men would have the duty to defend the tribe. But i don't think that humans were really besieged by beasts. Most wild animals avoid groups of humans, even many apex predators that are stronger than humans, do. So there is at least the consideration that by the time the modern homo-sapience came along our ancestors were already the dominant species. My guess would be that humans were really effective at hunting most large animals into near extinction and therefore the surviving ones inherited instinct or learned behavior of avoiding humans. I think that women probably also hunted, probably not big game with spears and nets but archery seems plausible. Many women seem to enjoy it as a hobby today.

On what are you basing your assumption that there are organ harvesting gangs lurking behind second-hand trade and hook-up apps? If you have an insight where the organ harvesting gangs are stalking their victims these days. You probably can get rich off that by organizing what would be a modern day bounty-hunter guild. Like being the go-between of private investigators, private security and police.

>>7469
>But it does not mean that men are predators and women are prey.
Ah I see the confusion, I meant like women might be more on alert for predators as a whole, not just men. Woman sees eyes in bush, shouts, man stabs bush.
>have you checked it?
I've been meaning to make a notebook / git repo where I keep notes on this sorta thing so I can actually substantiate my opinions whenever I spout them but I end up overcomplacating the project. I should just pick a technique and stick with it, not try to reimplament my entire worldview all at once.
>I think that women probably also hunted, probably not big game with spears and nets but archery seems plausible.
Oh certainly, especially the archery part, I've just been under the impression the genders would sway more toward specific tasks, but it couldn've been hard lines.
>On what are you basing your assumption that there are organ harvesting gangs lurking behind second-hand trade and hook-up apps?
Heard stories about it, again neglecting to keep note of the source. No statistics though, just anecdotes.

This is just a big fat cope written by some homosexual neo-nazi.

>>7419
>>7515
this book seems to romanticise mascukinity as primal warring.
It makes the classic mistake of equating technology and mechanisarion to castration.

It accuses modern men of being mommas boys simply for not living in primitive times fighting large animals to bring home to the tribe.
The author is a self described "gentleman" growing up in rural Pennsylvania.

>Since most anons here seem clueless about what masculinity actually is
I for one am very sober about what that means to me, you might be projecting your own insecurities.

>>7833
>accuses modern men of being mommas boys simply for not living in primitive times fighting large animals to bring home to the tribe
It would actually be nice is it were that simple. Even primitive man had the technology to be a threat to any other creature. A man with a stick is at the top of the food chain. I also don't see why women with bows and arrows or spears couldn't help out too, I've seen some big strong chicks IRL that definitely have it in them to kill a mamoth… I also doubt we know the exact relationship between sexes in the time of cavemen, extrapolating from geological evidence wouldn't give you a good picture IMO. Who is to say the men hunted and the women stayed home? Seems like projection of our times onto theirs.

The problem for the men and women of our time is so much more comprehensive in scope it is an intimidating task for us and would be unfathomable to early man in comparison.

We the proletariat, by far the majority of men and women on the planet, have to learn how to fight and win against the ruling class or face complete annihilation. In no uncertain terms, it's either socialism or extinction. And we don't even know what to do exactly.

China has a long term plan to grow their productive forces to the point that a socialist model of production is superior. Even this goal remains to be realized. But even if we in the west are completely fucked, even if we don't know what to do yet, we must struggle. In the words of the witch: there is no alternative.

Ironically I think it's OP that needs to man up and read serious theory and start thinking about actual material issues, not some feels-based creative writing about how to be more of a man based on whatever definition of manliness some other man created.

>>7881
This. Most discussions about masculinity often delve into the same cartoonish impression of "Conan The Barbarian" against some giants or fighting an epic war.


Gender roles were mainly just about who makes seed and who bleeds every month
All that "women are dainty and must be worshipped" is a modern invention made by Germanics.