archomrade [he/him]

I actually don’t think there’s any “crash”, they’re just being sold a false idea of masculinity from the jump. They’re unhappy because they’re told (and shown through cultural male representation) that healthy men are satyric and dominant and are encouraged to seek sexual satisfaction over seeking emotional satisfaction, and then get frustrated when the object of their sexual desire rejects them in favor of emotional satisfaction over the sexual.

I think Joe Rogan fits into that genre because he very much views masculinity through a naturalistic lense, even if he isn’t advocating for toxic male behavior as explicitly as Tate or fresh and fit.

Getting attention from women shouldn’t be the goal at all, it should be forming satisfying emotional connections, and that is something men are simply not taught.

The value of a landlord in theory is that they rent at a rate lower than what the mortgage would be

I don’t mean to sound rude, but this might as well be fan fiction.

a good landlord [is one] who maintains their property

That job exists - they are called maintenance workers: plumbers, electricians, roofers, handymen…

What makes a landlord a landlord - and not a handyman - is the ownership of property and extraction of rent for its use. It is definitionally not the labor involved in maintaining it.

If landlords want to be paid for maintaining properties they can get jobs as maintenance workers.

we could just build more high-density units

Profit is a byproduct of free exchange of labor

FTFY

Value is added regardless of whether the labor was freely exchanged.

That said: rent isn’t a result of any labor at all

Doing it over things that Biden didn’t do, I don’t agree with

So like two examples would be saying Biden’s bad on marijuana policy, or saying he’s bad for the climate because he’s not doing enough to drag the US government into the vague proximity of something that will enable us to continue existing in 100 years.

Ok, well, sure, but you can see how these two assertions aren’t fabrications about something Biden ‘did’, it’s a statement that he isn’t doing enough to address the problem or even mitigate the bulk of the harm those things have… Right?

I understand you don’t like criticisms of Biden because it feels like a threat to his re-election, but that doesn’t make those criticisms a fabrication nor does it make them misplaced.

Attacking him from the nonsense-perspective that he’s actively hurting the climate on purpose and using right-wing talking points to make that case, giving him trouble in his election against Donald Trump with no particular way that he could address your concern and thus no productive pressure on him that will produce a good result, that sounds less great.

I’m not sure who if anyone has said he’s ‘actively hurting the climate on purpose’, but I see a potential misinterpretation if someone said something about his approval of new oil drilling in Alaska (after campaigning on ‘no new drilling contracts’) - or approval of new gas pipelines - as an indication of “active” harm to the environment. A huge part of our disagreement exists in a difference of opinion on what ‘reasonable’ action he could take. And while a case could be made that he’s done what he can without threatening US interests, a lot of leftists would say that the US has far too many interests and influences to begin with.

And I think this goes back to what I originally said: liberals are just not in alignment with leftist interests. Leftists give more weight to real climate impact over things liberals tend to give weight to, such as economic growth and GDP or international energy independence or hostile foreign relations. A lot of the reasons Biden doesn’t do more are reasons leftists fundamentally disagree with. He is unwilling to take action that harms the system we seek to dismantle, and that means he frequently falls short of any kind of satisfactory result.

Maybe that’s why you remain frustrated that we don’t recognize his accomplishments; we see them as the continued prioritization of interests that are in conflict with progressive goals.

deleted by creator

where does making up things that Biden didn’t do and accusing him of doing them and so laying some propaganda groundwork for Trump to win the general election fit into that

I am having a really hard time parsing this one out, and i’m not sure what inaccurate accusations this is in reference to, but I’m reminded of this quote from Malcom X:

Early in life I had learned that if you want something, you had better make some noise.

Expressing objections loudly is the actual definition of protest, which is effective solely by a function of its potential to damage reputation or public support. A protest lacking genuine threat is nothing more than political self-indulgence.

You might as well be complaining that the protest is too effective, IMHO.

I have no idea how to interpret this comment.

Protests don’t mean anything if it isn’t disruptive to people who hold the power. They have a better chance protesting against a politician who isn’t going to put them down with lethal rounds and who has a lot to loose right now, rather than against the same politician after they have nothing to loose and a demonstrated history of not giving a fuck about progressive issues, or against a different politician who has no problem putting them down with paramilitary forces.

Protesting against Biden now is the best time and person to be protesting, and threatening to withhold support is as much leverage any leftist will ever have outside of less-than-legal economic disruption.

Of course not, I just think that pretending that they share the same interests and concerns as you is naive and willfully ignorant of their viewpoint. They clearly understand that you do not share their interests. Bragging about the marginal improvements to the problematic system they are fighting against is the height of hubris, especially if the aim is to actually change their mind.

“Put your concerns aside so that you can work for change when the stakes are lower” is just asking those people to sacrifice the only political leverage they have so that a politician that is ambivalent about their concerns can win re-election. If you’re uncomfortable with the threat of their dissent then it is having exactly the intended effect and they should absolutely keep doing it.

Maybe 20 years down the road that little bit is what tips us into a “luckier” (relatively speaking) outcome

You’re not listening. The people you’re talking to do not believe we have 20 years.

You don’t have to agree with that analysis in order to understand the objections of those who do. Repeatedly berating leftists for critiquing Biden isn’t going to persuade them to change their mind.

Why would cannabis rescheduling matter to someone who thinks the climate has already crossed the carbon-feedback tipping-point and we’re a decade away from mass-crop failure?

Why would forgiving a fraction of existing federally-owned student debt matter to someone who believes that capital accumulation is accelerating and locking them into a permanent state of home rental and wage slavery regardless?

If you believe that our current political climate (and the rise of fascism in the US) is a direct result of 200+ years of capital accumulation leading to very real and accelerating economic disenfranchisement of the working class, why would a politician who swears by and protects that system from fundamental change be one you are at all happy with?

‘But if you don’t help us beat this other guy things will only get worse!’ is a pointless plea to those who believe that the system Biden is defending is what is creating the fascist movement to begin with. The people you are trying to reason with are closer to blowing up a pipeline than they are to being convinced that modest incremental change will do anything more than give fascists more time to organize their own movement.

You don’t need to share that perspective to understand why those people might find the accomplishments in your list petty and ineffectual.

Biden campaigned on the notion that ‘nothing fundamentally will change’ - big surprise that the people who think we need fundamental systemic change aren’t happy with what little he’s done to paper over big issues.

Liberals are just not in alignment with leftist goals, i’m not sure why we keep pretending otherwise.

Been that way since the api exodus

No disagreement, I just find the way it’s presented in that title to be funny.

Imagine having to go to the dentist to get your erectile disfunction treated

Lmao this headline sounds so petty

I finally found one I don’t understand!

I might have been too-young when they transitioned; i had a children’s camera that didn’t have a flash at all, and by the time I was in middle-school everything had switched to electric flashes and disposable cameras (which we enjoyed abusing by charging the flash and then smacking the camera to short the flimsy flash circuit without exposing the film).