Commercial about changing the definition of Masculinity

[Diogenes of Sinope]

Funny thing is an actual masculine dude would probably just shrug in response to every one of these stupid questions.

Interviewer reads the definition of "masculine" that scares all of these femmes. Masculine dude: shrug.

Ten insecure effeminate weirdos go on for ten minutes about how the definition of "masculine" scares and threatens them. Masculine dude shrugs.

Ten insecure effeminate weirdos go on about how being aggressive should no longer be part of the definition of "masculine." They look to the masculine dude to join them. He shrugs. Effeminate dudes probably then get aggressive.

fact

 

[Reyesnuthugr]

Jeesh, you're far down the "red pill" rabbit hole huh?

Yes, it's a conversation. We are having one right now. Sexual identity, gender identity, potato, potato. I don't mean sexual orientation. They are talking about what constitutes the masculine and being male. Didn't someone like Prince or Bowie broaden the term masculinity or manliness in a lot of ways? I mean those two dudes were wearing makeup and high heels, very effeminate, and they pulled A LOT of tail. Still the world didn't end and we are not all wearing high heels.

Aggressiveness has always had primarily negative connotations, but it depends on the context.

Who are "they" and exactly which control do "they" have over your life? This is what I don't get. I don't give a fuck what anyone says, I have my own way of being masculine. If someone says that I shouldn't do violent sports, chase tail and be assertive, then I say GTFO, and if someone says that I shouldn't be supportive of LGBT rights, shouldn't be compassionate and should feel threatened by "PC culture" , then I say GTFO too. I know you are worried, but I am honestly not. You are playing right into the identity politics that you hate. Don't worry bud, we are plenty of people who like embrace the same manly qualities as you. If a few other people do not, the sky wont start falling down.

I think you're talking about things that you associate with masculinity and not masculinity itself.

You need to listen better. I don't even count myself as manly, that's just not who I am and I don't want to change that, either. But trying to control language by taking control of it to manipulate definitions is a dangerous and needless path. It's wrong regardless of who does it. You are pushing me into your convenient stereotype of who you think someone would be that would oppose this, and then simply writing that off, which is fucking rude.

This push IS identity politics, and you're right that it's not healthy for an individual or society. Your last couple lines are just insulting yet not analytical in any way. You're too offended to see what the argument is.

 

[MoparOrNoCar]

Yeah, they are. And TS is one of them. Only a pussy would be rustled by a commercial like that.

Jack you're a walking cliche of liberal debate tactics in this thread.

Yeah yeah I know, "real men" don't get mad at anything because they're just so god damn masculine and manly that nothing bothers them. If someone gets irritated by something, they're "salty" or "rustled" or a "snowflake" or whatever other term you kids use these days to try and get under the skin of someone who is shitting all over something you believe in.

I just think it's a pathetic attempt to try and change the definition of a word. I'm not a lot of things that I'd like to be but I don't go around trying to change the definition of the word because of it. What it's doing is just throwing another little birdie in the ears of kids that are watching the programming. The commercial has a very serious tone to it as if it's a commercial to stop domestic or drug abuse. It's designed to grab you and make you listen. Kids don't know about all the politics and shit behind it so they see the commercial and think that maybe they are doing something wrong if the things they are doing are construed as masculine. They make it seem like you're insulting them or somehow making them unhappy by being different than they are. To me, that is wrong.

I'm perfectly confident in myself these days so if you want to play amateur armchair liberal psychologist, then go ahead. You've already covered the whole bit about me being mad because I'm a pussy. Now you can move on to the lame ass debate tactic "TS must be _____ because he doesn't like _____".

edit - lmao just saw that you did exactly that in a later post. Good god Jack your kind is so predictable.

 

[OCGSC]

lol @ this airing on ESPN. They constantly worship the standard for masculinity in the form of freak athletes like Lebron, but now they want to tell us that we are wrong to do the same?

Pussifacation the marine recruiter told me about this and I can't deny the fact the this "men" want to change masculinity wow.

 

[plataoplombo]

If they're trying to get me to wear skinny jeans, it's just not gonna happen. Also, only 1 or maybe 2 guys in that commercial looked like they would be capable of changing a tire much less anything physical, so I can't really take them seriously.

 

[Jack Reacheround]

Jack you're a walking cliche of liberal debate tactics in this thread.

Yeah yeah I know, "real men" don't get mad at anything

Lol @ you talking shit about my “debate tactics” then spewing out that bullshit. I never said real men don’t get mad at anything. Nice try. If you have to mischaracterize what I said so blatantly to make your point, you have nothing.

 

[MoparOrNoCar]

Lol @ you talking shit about my “debate tactics” then spewing out that bullshit. I never said real men don’t get mad at anything. Nice try. If you have to mischaracterize what I said so blatantly to make your point, you have nothing.

Shit like that is annoying huh?

Even though you've annoyed me here, I still love you.

Remember, being masculine is about loving and being loved.

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

I think you're talking about things that you associate with masculinity and not masculinity itself.

You need to listen better. I don't even count myself as manly, that's just not who I am and I don't want to change that, either. But trying to control language by taking control of it to manipulate definitions is a dangerous and needless path. It's wrong regardless of who does it. You are pushing me into your convenient stereotype of who you think someone would be that would oppose this, and then simply writing that off, which is fucking rude.

This push IS identity politics, and you're right that it's not healthy for an individual or society. Your last couple lines are just insulting yet not analytical in any way. You're too offended to see what the argument is.

For every boring explicit commercial about upending social norms there are hundred subtle social cues reinforcing those norms that are actually effective because they're embedded in real life.

Blowing up the significance of this commercial makes it seem like you're conspicuously blind to the dominant side of the conversation.

 

[Reyesnuthugr]

For every boring explicit commercial about upending social norms there are hundred subtle social cues reinforcing those norms that are actually effective because they're embedded in real life.

Blowing up the significance of this commercial makes it seem like you're conspicuously blind to the dominant side of the conversation.

It's the general push itself (and the obvious underhandedness) that bothers me. Claiming that I'm worried about this ad (or any single example) per se is just another generic attempt to marginalize any opposition to this social engineering power grab.

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

It's the general push itself (and the obvious underhandedness) that bothers me. Claiming that I'm worried about this ad per se is just a generic attempt to marginalize the opposition of this social engineering push.

Lol yea your position is sooooo marginal.

Edgy too.

 

[Reyesnuthugr]

Lol yea your position is sooooo marginal.

Edgy too.

I wasn't even claiming that. Are you high?

But you are attempting to marginalize what I've presented right now, this post of yours is proof.
You're not using an argument or coherent position so I guess you realize that you don't deserve to be conversed with, let alone taken with any seriousness at all.

 

[Jack Reacheround]

Shit like that is annoying huh?

Even though you've annoyed me here, I still love you.

Remember, being masculine is about loving and being loved.

No, i don’t find winning arguments annoying.

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

I wasn't even claiming that. Are you high?

But you are attempting to marginalize what I've presented right now, this is proof.

You're not using an argument or coherent position so I guess you realize that you don't deserve to be conversed with, let alone taken with any seriousness at all.

I just find it ironic that you want to debate the definitions of words when you can't even use them correctly yourself.

There is no "attempt to marginalize" the dominant position. It doesn't exist at the margins. It likely never will outside of the fantasy lands of the "persecuted resistance".

What truly can't be reasoned with is the relativistic politics of subjective emotions. If you're worried about coherent debate you're going to want to step back into reality and try to understand what's actually happening.

You've been "socially-conditioned" in the opposite direction in a much more underhanded way for pretty much forever.

 

[Reyesnuthugr]

I just find it ironic that you want to debate the definitions of words when you can't even use them correctly yourself.

There is no "attempt to marginalize" the dominant position. It doesn't exist at the margins. It likely never will outside of the fantasy lands of the "persecuted resistance".

What truly can't be reasoned with is the relativistic politics of subjective emotions. If you you're worried about coherent debate you're going to want to step back into reality and try to understand what's actually happening.

You've been "socially-conditioned" in the opposite direction in a much more underhanded way for pretty much forever.

"Marginalize the argument (or the person presenting an argument)" not the "dominant position." You're the one who pretends to care about "dominant position," which in reality, means nothing.

You've created a false argument with yourself that I never bought into. If you didn't care-- like you claim I shouldn't-- you wouldn't be acting like this. Social conditioning is a funny concept from you. Is social conditioning something we should abhor or be weary of? Because here it is, social conditioning in all it's glory and you're defending the most obvious attempt at it only to turn right around and mock me claiming that social conditioning is wrong.

You have no argument, stop talking to me

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

"Marginalize the argument (or the person presenting an argument)" not the "dominant position." You're the one who pretends to care about "dominant position," which in reality, means nothing.

You've created a false argument with yourself that I never bought into. If you didn't care-- like you claim I shouldn't-- you wouldn't be acting like this. Social conditioning is a funny concept from you. Is social conditioning something we should abhor or be weary of? Because here it is, social conditioning in all it's glory and you're defending the most obvious attempt at it only to turn right around and mock me claiming that social conditioning is wrong.

You have no argument, stop talking to me

You're not going to understand anyone's arguments when you selectively ignore the concepts they're presenting to you. Part of what I'm pushing back against in your posts is the serious disparity in proportion between your understanding of the issue and your dramatic faux-outrage.

What you refer to as "social conditioning" is a learning mechanism that is neither inherently good nor bad in itself. Society is conditioning everyone, always, that's part of what keeps it stable as an entity. You can certainly disagree with aspects of that conditioning, but to complain simply that it's happening is like complaining that there's weather. That's not even to mention that these top-down, public-service type stunts are among the least effective methods of changing anything.

 

[MoparOrNoCar]

Men and women evolved for millions of years to get to this point and we became the dominant species because of it. If you refused to do anything "masculine" just a few hundred years ago, you're most likely dead. We didn't survive as a species because of love and whatever other harmonious bullshit people want to replace the definition of the word with. If you weren't masculine enough to hunt and gather for food and fight off deadly predators, then you didn't survive.

A lot of guys these days just sit around and code on their computers and play on their smart phones all day. Their masculinity has nothing to do with their survival and their lack of masculinity is directly reflected from the environment they grew up and live in. These are the dorks that are trying to change the definition of the word because it's something they want to be, but simply are not. Otherwise, why would it be offensive to them?

I'd like to have a nice full head of hair, but I do not. I'd like to have the junk of a porn star, but I do not. I don't go around crusading to have words and phrases changed to make myself feel better. It doesn't matter if you're a man or a woman, you come to realize what you have and what you have not by a certain age and you accept it and move the fuck on. I call it maturity and those who try to change the definition of words to make themselves feel better seem to lack it.

 

[Medulla Omoplata]

Shit like that is annoying huh?

Even though you've annoyed me here, I still love you.

Remember, being masculine is about loving and being loved.

Don't mean to interrupt but if you've got a spare moment I'll take some of that loving you're giving out.

Whenever you're free, no rush.

 

[Reyesnuthugr]

You're not going to understand anyone's arguments when you selectively ignore the concepts they're presenting to you. Part of what I'm pushing back against in your posts is the serious disparity in proportion between your understanding of the issue and your dramatic faux-outrage.

What you refer to as "social conditioning" is a learning mechanism that is neither inherently good nor bad in itself. Society is conditioning everyone, always, that's part of what keeps it stable as an entity. You can certainly disagree with aspects of that conditioning, but to complain simply that it's happening is like complaining that there's weather. That's not even to mention that these top-down, public-service type stunts are among the least effective methods of changing anything.

Help! I'm socially conditioned to not accept social conditioning routines!

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

Help! I'm socially conditioned to not accept social conditioning routines!

What was that you were saying about not having an argument or coherent position?

 

[Reyesnuthugr]

What was that you were saying about not having an argument or coherent position?

I'm presenting your argument. You're actually correct for once in that your argument is neither coherent or an argument at all

Lol- I can't believe you thought that would fly under the radar