Ask Lemmy

Far worse than mansplaining, when you mention or react to misandry you are demonstrating signs of being on the slippery slope to becoming a mass shooter.

(Not something I believe; reporting what the zeitgeist claims)

More generally, there is an archetype of a “man who’s gone bad” and human society tends to view such men as extremely dangerous (because they can be).

At our current time in history, the tolerances on acceptable male behavior are extremely tight, and it doesn’t take much for a man to become marked for disposal.

The mechanism we currently use is this notion of a “pipeline” by which men who grumble about being mistreated are considered to be destined for total severance from decency and a descent into individual terrorism.

But really, it’s just an intensification of the ever-present male disposability. The enhancement is caused by the fact that the mating ratio has changed. With the proliferation of tinder and other hookup apps, a successfully-mating man can fuck hundreds of women per year.

This means the number of men we can dispose of while still maintaining a sense of generational reproductive security has gone up, and our collective unconscious is therefore searching for reasons to dispose of men.

That’s the underlying psychosocial energy pattern. The manifestation is an expansion of all categories related to “dangerous man”.

Just like the system criminalizes crack way more than cocaine, as a way of targeting black people, which is an expression of racist psychosocial energy, manifesting in legal excuses to lock black people up.

The same thing happens with men, by modulating the levels of male disposability via cultural rules.

This is, fundamentally, why men feel more and more constrained to act in a narrow band of acceptable behavior.