Just because he's right in one area doesn't mean he can't be cuckoo in another

[Kasey Chang]

I sometimes watch podcast and YT videos by Joker on the "Better Bachelor" channel. It's mostly "red pill", "man going his own way" type of stuff, where he basically roasts feminism and unrealistic expectations of some women. I agree with quite a bit of what he said, and recently, I decided to sign up at Locals.com, where he has an uncensored channel due to YT's censorship. (Lots of others are there too)

It's where I sorta realized he can be pretty loony in his world views, everything's a conspiracy. Police arrested some guy planning an attack? It's a false flag operation to bolster FBI claims to "watch out for domestic terrorism since the Capital Hill thing". DOD tweet of a photo of an UAE C-17 instead of a USAF C-17 in Kabul (the tweet mentioned USAF C-17s) is interpreted as "they (BIg Brother) is lying to us".

What else has disillusioned you recently (instead of Kabul situation)?

[Unagi]

Errrrr. Maybe you should rethink your position on “feminism and the unrealistic expectations of some women“.
I have no idea what the arguments that are being made there , but that second half sounds a little misogynistic

[Skinypupy]

What else has disillusioned you recently?

That there is a viable (and likely quite profitable) target audience for "roasting feminism and unrealistic expectations of some women".

[Max Peck]

"man going his own way"

Men Going Their Own Way

Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW /ˈmɪɡtaʊ/) is an anti-feminist, misogynistic, mostly online community advocating for men to separate themselves from women and from a society which they believe has been corrupted by feminism. The community is a part of the manosphere, a collection of anti-feminist websites and online communities that also includes the men's rights movement, incels, and pickup artists.

Like other manosphere communities, MGTOW overlaps with the alt-right and white supremacist movements, and it has been implicated in online harassment of women. The Southern Poverty Law Center categorizes MGTOW as a part of the male supremacist ideology.

So, tell us more about what this Joker is right about. By which I mean alt-right about, of course.

[malchior]

When you have some estimates that some 20-25% or so of males between 18 to 30 might be virgins...yeah this is a thing now.

Edit:

[Jaymann]

Somebody needs to form a rock band: They Might Be Virgins.

[Alefroth]

"man going his own way"

Men Going Their Own Way

Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW /ˈmɪɡtaʊ/) is an anti-feminist, misogynistic, mostly online community advocating for men to separate themselves from women and from a society which they believe has been corrupted by feminism. The community is a part of the manosphere, a collection of anti-feminist websites and online communities that also includes the men's rights movement, incels, and pickup artists.

Like other manosphere communities, MGTOW overlaps with the alt-right and white supremacist movements, and it has been implicated in online harassment of women. The Southern Poverty Law Center categorizes MGTOW as a part of the male supremacist ideology.

Red Pill is also pretty gross.

[Kraken]

What else has disillusioned you recently (instead of Kabul situation)?

Last week we went to my favorite beer bar, and they were having a "songwriters in the round" thing on the patio where three local songwriters, each on their own stool, took turns singing an original song.

One singer wanted to get down from her stool but there was an inchworm (most likely a winter moth caterpillar, which is a nuisance species) in the way, and she didn't want to risk stepping on it. So there was a minute of confusion until one of the other singers found a piece of paper to gently pick it up and relocate it to safety. They were all talking to it like a pet while the small audience oo'd and ah'd.

Crap like that is why people hate liberals.

[LordMortis]

Didn't Elon Musk make a big deal out of taking the Red Pill?

[coopasonic]

So, tell us more about what this Joker is right about. By which I mean alt-right about, of course.

Or don't... because fuck that.

[coopasonic]

Didn't Elon Musk make a big deal out of taking the Red Pill?

A much better example of someone who is right in one (some) area and cuckoo in others.

[LordMortis]

Didn't Elon Musk make a big deal out of taking the Red Pill?

A much better example of someone who is right in one (some) area and cuckoo in others.

Aye

[Kasey Chang]

Errrrr. Maybe you should rethink your position on “feminism and the unrealistic expectations of some women“.
I have no idea what the arguments that are being made there , but that second half sounds a little misogynistic

Hey, it's an interesting exercise in self-sealing thought bubbles. He doesn't go nearly as far as Donovan Sharpe (screen name) who did an entire course in "womanese", i.e. translate what woman says vs. what she really "meant". That's some mean ****.

Joker's roasts are actually quite moderate. Basically it's about toxic advice, the stereotypes of "alphas vs betas", how some "feminists" want equality when it benefits them, but ONLY when it benefits them. For example, there was some talk on how people reacted to Kelly Clarkson having to pay her ex alimony to the tune of almost 200K a month. She makes about $1.5M a month, so it should not be difficult. But you can see the Twittersphere explode with "why oh why". And Joker was calling out this sort of double-standard. "You want equality, and now you bemoan equality" or something like that.

There's also some stuff about why do women in 30's and 40's claim "there are no good men"... Are they just not seeing good men? Does their definition of good men exclude 95% of all men? According to joker (and a good part of the man-o-sphere) woman who bemoan "lack of good men" spend their prime years (late teens to mid-twenties) going after the unobtainable 1% but not getting any commitment, but because they got at least some temporary action, decided to keep going, even as their assets depreciated, while ignoring the other 99% of men. And this is men's fault for being not good enough. Oversimplification and a fair bit of misogyny there, but it make sense as a strawman of sorts.

Then there are the weird cases that make you wonder why would we get involved with women at all.

* surgeon who makes multi-million a year found his pageant queen wife is doing escort business behind his back for 5+ years

* why TV and TV ads can sexualize man, but not woman? (Any one remember the Alexa ad featuring Michael B. Jordan? If you gender-flip that Amazon would be facing a firestorm, but because it featured a guy it's just "funny")

* why would North Carolina make sperm donor pay child support? This case is complicated, so here's a TL;DR version:

AG agreed to provide EG with sperm for artificial insemination because EG wanted a child with her partner.

AG lives in North Carolina, but AG and EG met up in Virginia in 2011, where the insemination occurred.

EG moved to California a few years later 2014 and got public benefits

In 2019, North Carolina went to court suing AG for child support. AG's lawyer said where the child's conceived (Virginia) sperm donor is not considered a conceived child's parent. But the judge applied North Carolina law instead, which offered no such clause. AG was ordered to pay $13600, plus monthly payment and health insurance for child. AG appealed.

In 2021 Court of Appeals 3-judge panel struck down the ruling, saying the conceived child's state should be the law being applied. EG and the child lived in Virginia after the birth until their move, and all the pre-birth activity also happen in Virginia.

So Joker was basically touting this as "if even a sperm donor could be made to pay child support for a child he already signed away parental rights, is man safe ANYWHERE?" Basically chicken little argument, slipper slope, etc. It is entertaining, but this is a case where reason prevailed.

[Kasey Chang]

Didn't Elon Musk make a big deal out of taking the Red Pill?

He's shacked up with that single-name artist/musician and already has a kid or two, didn't he?

[hitbyambulance]

There's also some stuff about why do women in 30's and 40's claim "there are no good men"

this is a good example of why i think this whole mindset is self-centered garbage - why do you even care about this in the first place? wouldn't that just be the woman's problem? why are you spending mental capacity endlessly ruminating over what others (or in this case, "Others") think or say, especially gross generalizations? but probably the answer is that this whole mindset comprises grievance and entitlement as well. and i think it all comes down to a basic MEN ARE OWED SEX BY WOMEN!! IT IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT!!!

women have been more than reasonable about pushing back on exploitation and demeaning behavior from others. and some (many?) men act like spoiled toddlers when they can't get their way 100% of the time.

So Joker was basically touting this as "if even a sperm donor could be made to pay child support for a child he already signed away parental rights, is man safe ANYWHERE?" Basically chicken little argument, slipper slope, etc. It is entertaining, but this is a case where reason prevailed.

i agree the child support laws are pretty effed up (i was on the receiving end of that particular heel of the state for many years). but this is, to me, the only valid concern of the whole 'Men's Rights' thing (otherwise summed up as:

A much better example of someone who is right in one (some) area and cuckoo in others.

[raydude]

There's also some stuff about why do women in 30's and 40's claim "there are no good men"

this is a good example of why i think this whole mindset is self-centered garbage - why do you even care about this in the first place? wouldn't that just be the woman's problem? why are you spending mental capacity endlessly ruminating over what others (or in this case, "Others") think or say, especially gross generalizations? but probably the answer is that this whole mindset comprises grievance and entitlement as well. and i think it all comes down to a basic MEN ARE OWED SEX BY WOMEN!! IT IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT!!!

women have been more than reasonable about pushing back on exploitation and demeaning behavior from others. and some (many?) men act like spoiled toddlers when they can't get their way 100% of the time.

I couldn't get a relationship until I was a junior in college and I couldn't hold long-term relationships in my twenties and early thirties. When I was younger I always thought the problem was with the woman, i.e. why was I not good enough. Thank God I developed introspection as I got older. I took a good look at myself, and my behavior in my previous relationships and realized "If I was dating my past self, I'd break up with me too." It wasn't until I realized I had to truly recognize my partner as my equal that I found a lasting relationship.

I agree that probably for the majority of these men the problem lies in not enough introspection and respect for women.

[Kasey Chang]

Now I am even more disillusioned as the frequent posters over there seem to be far-right antivaxxers as well.

*sigh*

[Smoove_B]

"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."

[hepcat]

What doesn’t kill you…makes you seek hospitalization.

[Daehawk]

Now I am even more disillusioned as the frequent posters over there seem to be far-right antivaxxers as well.

*sigh*

[Sudy]

I remember several years ago I was watching a skeptic/debunker on Youtube who encountered one of these guys and formed the initial conclusion that while he may not have agreed with some aspects of their movement, he could see where they were coming from and respected their intentions. That's how they get you. On the surface, much of what they say seems reasonable. It may even be captivating. (I watch some of those Youtube pre-roll ads far longer than 5 seconds.) But it doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Many of the underlying notions are gross, unscientific, and ludicrous. I web search every organization and philosophy before I even consider unzipping my pants.

Or, ask your friends.

[YellowKing]

I watch a lot of ghost hunter/paranormal shows, and many conspiracy theories/anti-science arguments are built on the same shaky scaffolding. You take a premise that has no basis in reality (ghosts are real and emit electromagnetic fields that can be detected by EMF detectors), and you lay that down as your foundation. You then find "evidence" based on this underlying assumption to prove your point.

Once you repeat this enough, it becomes an accepted foundational "fact" that you can then contruct additional ideas on. Now that we 100% buy into the fact that ghosts are not only real, but can be detected via instruments, we can come up with any number of other additional detection devices - spirit boxes, motion detectors, etc. Before you know it we have 20 layers of accepted knowledge and insight about something that probably doesn't exist.

This scaffolding can get incredibly complex, and dismantling it can be an arduous task. Especially when you're trying to fact-check every layer all the way down. Now move away from something as believe-it-or-not as ghosts, and apply this same scaffolding to a more mundane topic such as vaccines. Imagine the work it would take to dismantle that belief brick by brick.

It's really no wonder it's so difficult to change people's minds. It's an incredible amount of effort. It's not as simple as fact-checking one premise. You have to fact-check all of them, all the way down. And it's super easy, even as a non-believer in the conspiracy, to dig down about 5 levels, get to something that's too much work to dig deeper, and say, "Well, I guess they have a point...."

[Skinypupy]

Hope you don't mind if I steal that YK. It's a very good example.

[YellowKing]

Don't mind at all Skiny - glad someone found it at least worth pondering. It just occurred to me this morning while I was watching my daily dose of Paranormal: CAUGHT ON CAMERA!