Why are younger men so right wing?

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:In recent years, Democrats really went out of their way to ostracize and demonize young straight white men. It's not a surprise some turned toward the Republican Party. The Democratic Party is a very little tent these days.


How so exactly? We are late 30’s (so not “young”) and DH does not feel ostracized. He has know idea why other white men like Trump.


Yes I hear this a lot. And I too would like to know how young men were ostracized?

Was it:
-By sharing educational and employment opportunties?
-Asking them to keep their dicks in their pants and hands to themself, unless asked to do so otherwise?
-keep their catcalls and misogynistic comments to themselves and treat people fairly? (I could tell you stories just in the last 20 years of things said to me by men IN THE WORKPLACE that would make your toes curl.)

So, do tell?
Anonymous
Young men and MAGA have such incredibly low self esteem. They don’t believe they have anything to offer and no woman would voluntarily live with them. So they are trying to use the laws to force others to have less rights than them. They are so insecure that they need laws to force wives to marry and and stay with them. They know they have nothing to offer on their own accord, I suppose. This is the only explanation- the underlying cause of their actions.

Men who are secure and who have something to offer don’t need laws to force women to stay with them. Women stay because they love and respect these men. And these men have male friends because other men also respect them.

If you need a law or a religion to force a woman to stay with you, you are screaming that you are not worth much.
Anonymous
Take a look in the mirror.
Anonymous
The majority of white men are going to be serfs in a year, so let’s see how they feel then.
Anonymous
Now the Heritage Foundation wants to create marriage boot camps, restrict porn, reduce alimony rights, and give a huge tax break to families.

Gift link; https://wapo.st/3NjnQbg

Women need to have babies, stay home, and be financially dependent on their husbands. Nothing like being trapped in a bad marriage!
Anonymous
People hear men being asked to do better, and automatically jump to “you hate men”, which doesn’t make sense.

Someone who really hated men would tell them never to change or grow. They’d tell them that they’re animals who can’t help forcing themselves on women. They’d convince young men that the ideal relationship is a cold, transactional power struggle and no one will ever truly love them. They’d tell them their only value is in sleeping around and using and discarding teenage virgins. They’d tell them college is for losers. They’d make them feel constantly insecure and unworthy by calling them betas and cucks and low value. They’d whip up unrealistic standards and anger at women, undermining the ability of young men to form stable, adult relationships.

Someone like, say…the hundreds of internet manosphere grifters peddling this cynical, dead end vision to young men.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Now the Heritage Foundation wants to create marriage boot camps, restrict porn, reduce alimony rights, and give a huge tax break to families.

Gift link; https://wapo.st/3NjnQbg

Women need to have babies, stay home, and be financially dependent on their husbands. Nothing like being trapped in a bad marriage!


Some of their ideas are bat-guano insane:

“ Heritage also suggests creating government-seeded savings accounts — similar to the “Trump accounts” in the GOP’s new tax and immigration law — for newborns that could not be redeemed until the beneficiary marries or turns 30 years old. Withdrawals from the accounts after age 30 and outside marriage would be taxed.”

Using taxpayer money as leverage to bribe people into getting married. What could possibly go wrong?

“ “child-proxy voting,” where parents could cast an extra half-vote on behalf of each of their children”

Great, let’s also have dog-proxy, cat-proxy, and houseplant-proxy voting!

(I’m surprised they didn’t propose sperm-proxy voting, so that men could each have 10 million votes)

“legally punishing adultery and “homewrecker[s]”

The cheating husbands wouldn’t be punished, of course, just the mistress…

“And it considered prohibiting home sellers from off-loading starter homes until they’ve received a legitimate offer from a married couple with children”

What??? That’s legitimately nuts.

Instead of asking WHY people don’t want to get married and have children any more, and addressing root causes, they’re trying to ham-handedly legislate mating behavior with a thousand sticks and carrots. The only thing that’s going to breed is resentment and misery, as people get pressured into marriages they don’t want just for the tax and financial incentives.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:My son is 32 and just told me he voted for Trump three times. I’m embarrassed and feel like a failure. We raised him in a liberal environment and now he’s become radicalized

He’s not even your stereotypical trump voter or whatever. Good job in coastal city, just got engaged, owns a house, many friends. But he’s gone down this rabbit hole of right wing politics and it leaves me baffled


He’s not fooled by all the fake news on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSWhatever.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:My son is 32 and just told me he voted for Trump three times. I’m embarrassed and feel like a failure. We raised him in a liberal environment and now he’s become radicalized

He’s not even your stereotypical trump voter or whatever. Good job in coastal city, just got engaged, owns a house, many friends. But he’s gone down this rabbit hole of right wing politics and it leaves me baffled


He’s not fooled by all the fake news on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSWhatever.


Who cares?

OP's son deserves what he gets

Which is nothing, unless he's a billionaire

He's going to get nothing and deserves it because he's stupid
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Now the Heritage Foundation wants to create marriage boot camps, restrict porn, reduce alimony rights, and give a huge tax break to families.

Gift link; https://wapo.st/3NjnQbg

Women need to have babies, stay home, and be financially dependent on their husbands. Nothing like being trapped in a bad marriage!


Some of their ideas are bat-guano insane:

“ Heritage also suggests creating government-seeded savings accounts — similar to the “Trump accounts” in the GOP’s new tax and immigration law — for newborns that could not be redeemed until the beneficiary marries or turns 30 years old. Withdrawals from the accounts after age 30 and outside marriage would be taxed.”

Using taxpayer money as leverage to bribe people into getting married. What could possibly go wrong?

“ “child-proxy voting,” where parents could cast an extra half-vote on behalf of each of their children”

Great, let’s also have dog-proxy, cat-proxy, and houseplant-proxy voting!

(I’m surprised they didn’t propose sperm-proxy voting, so that men could each have 10 million votes)

“legally punishing adultery and “homewrecker[s]”

The cheating husbands wouldn’t be punished, of course, just the mistress…

“And it considered prohibiting home sellers from off-loading starter homes until they’ve received a legitimate offer from a married couple with children”

What??? That’s legitimately nuts.

Instead of asking WHY people don’t want to get married and have children any more, and addressing root causes, they’re trying to ham-handedly legislate mating behavior with a thousand sticks and carrots. The only thing that’s going to breed is resentment and misery, as people get pressured into marriages they don’t want just for the tax and financial incentives.



I guess it’s easier to do all that than have men expect to become a partner/team player in a marriage. Women must be forced into subservience.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Now the Heritage Foundation wants to create marriage boot camps, restrict porn, reduce alimony rights, and give a huge tax break to families.

Gift link; https://wapo.st/3NjnQbg

Women need to have babies, stay home, and be financially dependent on their husbands. Nothing like being trapped in a bad marriage!


Some of their ideas are bat-guano insane:

“ Heritage also suggests creating government-seeded savings accounts — similar to the “Trump accounts” in the GOP’s new tax and immigration law — for newborns that could not be redeemed until the beneficiary marries or turns 30 years old. Withdrawals from the accounts after age 30 and outside marriage would be taxed.”

Using taxpayer money as leverage to bribe people into getting married. What could possibly go wrong?

“ “child-proxy voting,” where parents could cast an extra half-vote on behalf of each of their children”

Great, let’s also have dog-proxy, cat-proxy, and houseplant-proxy voting!

(I’m surprised they didn’t propose sperm-proxy voting, so that men could each have 10 million votes)

“legally punishing adultery and “homewrecker[s]”

The cheating husbands wouldn’t be punished, of course, just the mistress…


“And it considered prohibiting home sellers from off-loading starter homes until they’ve received a legitimate offer from a married couple with children”

What??? That’s legitimately nuts.

Instead of asking WHY people don’t want to get married and have children any more, and addressing root causes, they’re trying to ham-handedly legislate mating behavior with a thousand sticks and carrots. The only thing that’s going to breed is resentment and misery, as people get pressured into marriages they don’t want just for the tax and financial incentives.




A red letter A on her clothing, à la Hester Prine?!
Anonymous
Was he in a fraternity OP? They are hotbeads of misogny.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:The left has nothing for him but blame.


I mean, that’s what he keeps being told but is it really accurate?

nope
Anonymous
Anonymous
Is the premise even true? I don't know any young white men who feel the way OP assumes they do.
Forum Index » Political Discussion
Go to: