4 ms·

The narrative starts with, "People who look like you are the problem, and your success is because you benefit from it." If the targeted person fails to complet

by btilly 11mo ago

The narrative starts with, "People who look like you are the problem, and your success is because you benefit from it." If the targeted person fails to completely agree with that narrative, they become labeled as the problem. This happens so quickly and consistently that hearing "people who look like you are the problem" short-circuits to "I was just told that I am the problem." When this is a young man's lived experience, he feels heard when he hears, "THEY say YOU are the problem!" from a vocal conservative. And this emotional validation makes it comfortable and easy to try to fit into this new group by adopting various of their attitudes and beliefs. This is exactly how I'm seeing this play out with my son. It started with experiences which felt like him being told that he is the problem. It lead to him being receptive to conservative rhetoric. I'm trying to undermine that rhetoric. But it is an uphill battle, against an emotionally comfortable slope.

ryandrake 11mo ago
Nothing in the article mentions anything about misandry or societal shaming of men. Instead, the author points to the many and various online addiction-machines being marketed towards men and being built with very little regulation. I think if we want our boys to grow up and avoid being these "Monks" the author talks about, the key is to help them to avoid addiction and gambling, and to help them to avoid these persecution complexes that come from isolated online culture.
- btilly 11mo ago
  Yes, the author points to what they think that the problem is, and what they think that the solution is. However the article connected me with the struggles of young men in my life. Which connects to what I see their problems as, and what the causes of those problems are. The message that I've heard from professionals who work on it says that addiction is largely a symptom. The disease is the problems that they are trying to avoid facing. Dominant among those diseases is a lack of social connection. The most successful interventions out there for addiction operate on this theory. Including the interventions that accompanied decriminalization of drugs in Portugal a quarter century ago. Which managed (varies by drug) 30-50% reductions in addiction rates. The author's theory is that the young men in question don't want social connection enough. They aren't lonely enough. This theory does not match my experience or understanding. The men in question are plenty lonely. They just have found unhealthy coping mechanisms for it. Like anger and addiction. In particular my thinking is strongly informed by the young man that I know best with a significant loneliness problem. From his narrative as he became radicalized against narratives that are dominant in his social environment. And his story finds echoes in a variety of toxic groups in society. And which fits with trends that are broadly reflected by polling. I think that the author brought up an issue that is important. But has the wrong prescription for it. We need to create more opportunity for social connection. And the opportunity starts with a willingness to listen to people we disagree with, rather than doubling down on polarization.

by btilly 11mo ago

ryandrake 11mo ago

Nothing in the article mentions anything about misandry or societal shaming of men. Instead, the author points to the many and various online addiction-machines being marketed towards men and being built with very little regulation. I think if we want our boys to grow up and avoid being these "Monks" the author talks about, the key is to help them to avoid addiction and gambling, and to help them to avoid these persecution complexes that come from isolated online culture.

btilly 11mo ago
Yes, the author points to what they think that the problem is, and what they think that the solution is. However the article connected me with the struggles of young men in my life. Which connects to what I see their problems as, and what the causes of those problems are. The message that I've heard from professionals who work on it says that addiction is largely a symptom. The disease is the problems that they are trying to avoid facing. Dominant among those diseases is a lack of social connection. The most successful interventions out there for addiction operate on this theory. Including the interventions that accompanied decriminalization of drugs in Portugal a quarter century ago. Which managed (varies by drug) 30-50% reductions in addiction rates. The author's theory is that the young men in question don't want social connection enough. They aren't lonely enough. This theory does not match my experience or understanding. The men in question are plenty lonely. They just have found unhealthy coping mechanisms for it. Like anger and addiction. In particular my thinking is strongly informed by the young man that I know best with a significant loneliness problem. From his narrative as he became radicalized against narratives that are dominant in his social environment. And his story finds echoes in a variety of toxic groups in society. And which fits with trends that are broadly reflected by polling. I think that the author brought up an issue that is important. But has the wrong prescription for it. We need to create more opportunity for social connection. And the opportunity starts with a willingness to listen to people we disagree with, rather than doubling down on polarization.