Because they are risk-takers and that seems manly.

Getting a corporate job where you need to remember to use the new cover page on the TPS report is not seen as manly.

Anonymous wrote:Men compete for resources to attack women. Welcome to Earth. Enjoy your stay.

Attract, but also attack.

And sometimes to attract men.

Men compete for resources to attack women. Welcome to Earth. Enjoy your stay.

Anonymous wrote:Young men don’t view capitalists as manly. The anger at the C suite and rejection of following that path is strongest in Gen Z.

Younger Gen Z hates older Gen Z and reject the notions above. It’s the COVID split.

Anonymous wrote:Compared to what? If the alternative is a terminally online internet leftist with no job and no prospects, I guess the entrepreneur types appear masculine in comparison.

Of course, that isn't actually the alternative. There are lots of different ways to be a man.

Anonymous wrote:The economy has shifted from brawn to brain over the last 50 years so it's strange to see this conflating of brawn and wealth.

Not what OP said.

The economy has shifted from brawn to brain over the last 50 years so it's strange to see this conflating of brawn and wealth.

Men, on both the right and the left, have a long history of whining about working for other men.

Young men don’t view capitalists as manly. The anger at the C suite and rejection of following that path is strongest in Gen Z.

Being cared for by the state denotes weakness, vulnerability, and submission, very unmasculine traits. Anti-capitalists usually do have these characteristics.

Furthermore, many of the traits often associated with those who tend to make it to the top of the capitalist system are perceived as masculine virtues: specifically risk taking and social dominance.

Anonymous wrote:The economy of the manosphere is basically 99% gullible idiots and 1% that are milking them and laughing on the way to the bank.

I don't know anyone who watches manosphere content unironically.

That includes my two teen sons who are mewing around the house then collapsing into giggles.

Entrepreneurial claims/jobs are possible even for low income people. That would be my guess. Small businesses have a huge failure rate. So probably this is comforting to consider cool because it can paper over failure.

I think there are different manospheres. Blue collar workers think they’re the most manly. White collar workers who are tech bros and make tons of money think they are. Others are entepreneuers, athletes, con artists, gangsters…

The economy of the manosphere is basically 99% gullible idiots and 1% that are milking them and laughing on the way to the bank.

Compared to what? If the alternative is a terminally online internet leftist with no job and no prospects, I guess the entrepreneur types appear masculine in comparison.

The rich used to be seen in popular culture as effete "fat cats." But the manosphere says that "real men" are entrepreneurs and if you work for a wage or salary you're not as "tough." Why the cultural shift?