A little advice I think necessary to give to the confused right-wing young men of America in the age of Trump II. My bottom line? Listen to the wise Eddie Cornelius...
Somewhat tangentially, but with respect to Zuckerberg it's worth recalling that he started Facebook as a fuckability rating service for Harvard undergraduates. There's the famous exchange. "Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard ...
Just ask. I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS
[What? How'd you manage that one?]
People just submitted it. I don't know why. They 'trust me' Dumb fucks."
It's worked out well for Zuckerberg, and he's one of our role models now - a more plausible one than Musk or Trump, perhaps, or at least a less performatively deranged one. I don't see him as confused, at all - or changed, in any way. Perhaps a bit more relaxed now, and freed from some marginal constraints, at very little cost.
I agree on the thrust of the analysis but I think it could recognise a couple of objective facts:
- men are likely to retain a significant advantage in waging war, which unfortunately does not seem to be likely to disappear from the world any earlier than the end of history;
- concerning the decline in TFR, its long-term consequences are bound to affect both men and women, possibly more women than men to the extent that, at least in advanced economies, they represent a significantly larger proportion of the very old in need of care. There is a MAD dimension to the war of the sexes.
Thanks Brad for linking these two (three actally) together. That’s they point males might complain but we are dying. It not really them that decide if the species survives. I know its abit superficial if I look at Trump and the latest Kennedy Jr I see has been males well past their prime but still klinging on. Jupp its a backlash but probably just i blip. Yesterday is gone
Zuck isn't wrong about Apple - it hasn't been inventive, and its iTunes platform is appalling rent-extracting. But this also doesn't excuse Meta's performance, not that of many of the tech giants either - Google and Microsoft to name just 2. That so many of the big tech companies are burning $$$$ on some AI utopia is indicative of the lack of innovation. Can I compare the state of the tech business to that of the big 3 US auto manufacturers by the 1970s? There is no innovation, just marginally changing the vehicle's shape each year.
As regards "men". Women getting university degrees now exceed men. At some point, this will change the shape of who controls the economy. Whether that makes men more competitive with each other to bag a desirable woman, idk.
I think to a degree male Trump voters are hoping he'll switch back the world to one in which they don't *have* to be liked: women will just have fewer choices (including things like access to contraceptives, never mind abortion). Doesn't work like that, and it's probably much more unfocused on their minds, but it's the closest I can think to "a plan."
Honestly it feels more like they large-scale equivalent of yelling "bitch!" and throwing something at somebody who rejected them. It's not a tactic; it's gleeful rage.
My mental model is a bit simpler than Brad's. Men had three things to offer women: economic resources, protection, and being a mensch. But today, women compete evenly with men in the workplace (except near the top.) And the workplace is where economic resources come from. The state offers a fair degree of physical protection. And being a mensch does not come easily to young men.
The masculinist response? Give up on economics, and double down on "protection." Doubling down on protection means belittling the state's protective ability, and thus the state. It also entails obsessing on physical violence. This leads to anti-state gun worship: hence "libertarianism." (The irony: a gun equalizes the violent capacity of men and women.) And it means that a lot of young men don't get laid, and fall deeper into fantasy-land.
Somewhat tangentially, but with respect to Zuckerberg it's worth recalling that he started Facebook as a fuckability rating service for Harvard undergraduates. There's the famous exchange. "Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard ...
Just ask. I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS
[What? How'd you manage that one?]
People just submitted it. I don't know why. They 'trust me' Dumb fucks."
It's worked out well for Zuckerberg, and he's one of our role models now - a more plausible one than Musk or Trump, perhaps, or at least a less performatively deranged one. I don't see him as confused, at all - or changed, in any way. Perhaps a bit more relaxed now, and freed from some marginal constraints, at very little cost.
The fact that the "top banker" asked for, and received, anonymity is a pretty big tell.
I agree on the thrust of the analysis but I think it could recognise a couple of objective facts:
- men are likely to retain a significant advantage in waging war, which unfortunately does not seem to be likely to disappear from the world any earlier than the end of history;
- concerning the decline in TFR, its long-term consequences are bound to affect both men and women, possibly more women than men to the extent that, at least in advanced economies, they represent a significantly larger proportion of the very old in need of care. There is a MAD dimension to the war of the sexes.
Thanks Brad for linking these two (three actally) together. That’s they point males might complain but we are dying. It not really them that decide if the species survives. I know its abit superficial if I look at Trump and the latest Kennedy Jr I see has been males well past their prime but still klinging on. Jupp its a backlash but probably just i blip. Yesterday is gone
Zuck isn't wrong about Apple - it hasn't been inventive, and its iTunes platform is appalling rent-extracting. But this also doesn't excuse Meta's performance, not that of many of the tech giants either - Google and Microsoft to name just 2. That so many of the big tech companies are burning $$$$ on some AI utopia is indicative of the lack of innovation. Can I compare the state of the tech business to that of the big 3 US auto manufacturers by the 1970s? There is no innovation, just marginally changing the vehicle's shape each year.
As regards "men". Women getting university degrees now exceed men. At some point, this will change the shape of who controls the economy. Whether that makes men more competitive with each other to bag a desirable woman, idk.
I think to a degree male Trump voters are hoping he'll switch back the world to one in which they don't *have* to be liked: women will just have fewer choices (including things like access to contraceptives, never mind abortion). Doesn't work like that, and it's probably much more unfocused on their minds, but it's the closest I can think to "a plan."
Honestly it feels more like they large-scale equivalent of yelling "bitch!" and throwing something at somebody who rejected them. It's not a tactic; it's gleeful rage.
re: Apple and Zuck
A friend took great delight in screwing Zuck on the purchase of WhatsAp. Zuck had rejected the first proffer and later realized his mistake.
My mental model is a bit simpler than Brad's. Men had three things to offer women: economic resources, protection, and being a mensch. But today, women compete evenly with men in the workplace (except near the top.) And the workplace is where economic resources come from. The state offers a fair degree of physical protection. And being a mensch does not come easily to young men.
The masculinist response? Give up on economics, and double down on "protection." Doubling down on protection means belittling the state's protective ability, and thus the state. It also entails obsessing on physical violence. This leads to anti-state gun worship: hence "libertarianism." (The irony: a gun equalizes the violent capacity of men and women.) And it means that a lot of young men don't get laid, and fall deeper into fantasy-land.
I wonder what wife Pricilla and Zuckerberg's three daughters will think about his current behavior.
re: Apple and Zuck
A friend took great delight in screwing Zuck on the purchase of WhatsAp. Zuck had rejected the first proffer and later realized his mistake.