3 ms·

The steel-man argument is that men have historically dominated society and decreasing their influence is a leveling process. That is to say, when one group is d

by seneca 2y ago

The steel-man argument is that men have historically dominated society and decreasing their influence is a leveling process. That is to say, when one group is dominant and another submissive, lowering the influence of the first and increasing it of the second is progress toward an equal position. It does seem like the wave has crested on this movement for now. Most intelligent people who aren't blatantly partisan are starting to express distaste toward it, and it's becoming less of a "shunned" position to push back on it.

rustcleaner 2y ago
>men have historically dominated society and decreasing their influence is a leveling process RICH men have hist... RICH men in the last 150 years figured out they can use poor mens' women (Hitler, anyone?) to get wealthier and solidify power. With double the tax base and nobody but the State to raise kids, the middle class became too mired in distractions and day-to-day survival and lacked intergenerational memetic staying power to address the benefactors of modern feminism: the moneyed class. Humans create social groups to survive in nature. One of the strongest bonds is the family, much stronger than bonds to the State are. The State has an interest in reducing family bonds which might compete against the State for piety. We like to get all warm and fuzzy about social contracts and such, but the fact is the State is a human-ranch and the owners of the ranch want you productive like bees in a hive and never able to throw them off. I digress. When it comes to merit, I strongly believe one is a fool for rejecting an otherwise ideal candidate just because he's black or not really a he. When you're making a family sure all that matters, but when running a business your goal is to make money not be the whitest most male business out there regardless of revenue! I do think UC schools deflating Asian SAT scores for social justice is as racist as inflating them.
- seneca 2y ago
  To be clear, this isn't an argument I believe in at all, which is why I was saying I was trying to steel-man it.

by seneca 2y ago

rustcleaner 2y ago

>men have historically dominated society and decreasing their influence is a leveling process RICH men have hist... RICH men in the last 150 years figured out they can use poor mens' women (Hitler, anyone?) to get wealthier and solidify power. With double the tax base and nobody but the State to raise kids, the middle class became too mired in distractions and day-to-day survival and lacked intergenerational memetic staying power to address the benefactors of modern feminism: the moneyed class. Humans create social groups to survive in nature. One of the strongest bonds is the family, much stronger than bonds to the State are. The State has an interest in reducing family bonds which might compete against the State for piety. We like to get all warm and fuzzy about social contracts and such, but the fact is the State is a human-ranch and the owners of the ranch want you productive like bees in a hive and never able to throw them off. I digress. When it comes to merit, I strongly believe one is a fool for rejecting an otherwise ideal candidate just because he's black or not really a he. When you're making a family sure all that matters, but when running a business your goal is to make money not be the whitest most male business out there regardless of revenue! I do think UC schools deflating Asian SAT scores for social justice is as racist as inflating them.

seneca 2y ago
To be clear, this isn't an argument I believe in at all, which is why I was saying I was trying to steel-man it.