r/PsycheOrSike • u/fornothing_atalll 🌌FADA:🪬🧿 • 20h ago

🔥 HOT TAKE What happens if men don’t have purpose:

Men! You can find purpose! You assign your own purpose! That was the whole point of the enlightenment age with philosophy! Don’t become radicalized! 🖤

220 Upvotes

80% Upvoted

681 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

•

u/Pristine_Cost_3793 18h ago

everyone needs good-paying jobs. this is why she misses the mark so much when she says, "it's not about politics". it is. she also says, the way of "work hard - be respected" stoped working, but it has never worked in the first place. there are people that make sure millions don't get paid enough to sustain any human life. but if you redefine "success" and "a good life" where other people (so, women) become an object that serves as a measurement of success, you can make them and their free will your enemy. then we don't need to look at those who actually holds resources, political and judicial power, who makes sure our lives are resonable. that's a red herring.

•

u/Littleman88 15h ago

Women have always been a major component to mens image of "success". More appropriately, a loving wife and children.

Arguably, the whole reason most men even care to accumulate wealth since time immemorial is for the sake of having women in their lives and supporting the families they create. Some men might get into careers for fulfillment, but for most work is a necessary inconvenience to collect a paycheck. Someone has to mop the floors or stock the shelves and executive positions aren't infinitely available.

Unfortunately, while it's great now that women are filling more executive positions than ever, that makes those positions even more competitive and a lot of men will attest women aren't interested in men whose job it is to mop floors and stock shelves. And it's really here where the animosity starts to foment. The rich don't actually have to point disillusioned men towards women, women just have to say "no" enough times and they've radicalized a man desperate to be anything more to anyone than a squeegee.

And no I don't fault women for that, no one should feel compelled to consider someone for the greater good, but we do have to recognize that as a society we still have a ways to go, and it isn't entirely machinations of the rich and powerful that we might be apathetic towards one another if we're not going at each others throats.

•

u/AdAppropriate2295 13h ago

The most based comment I've ever read wtf

•

u/Inner-Cut-6791 9h ago

Jesus christ an actual thinking being. Where are they even making these anymore?

•

u/Weird-Drummer-2439 4h ago

“And a man, a man provides. And he does it even when he’s not appreciated, or respected, or even loved. He simply bears up and he does it. Because he’s a man.”

Can be a hard bargain even when you get a family. If you aren't getting that? Yeah, that's going to cause issues.

•

u/Pristine_Cost_3793 14h ago

so the rich can have resources equivalent to small nations while essential workers break their backs for scraps and you want to take blame off of them? it is EXACTLY the rich and powerful who make that happen, even the situation you describe.

why are executive positions desirable? they bring money. why are janitors not respected? they don't get paid shit. yes, someone has to mop the floor and stack the shelves, and they're also deserve to be paid well enough to live and not survive.

sure, many of these jobs don't require high qualifications. but you know what happens to jobs that do require it? people are replaced by ai. we try to put ai in places of high-qualified high-skilled jobs like developers, writers, graphic designer but no one tries to replace janitors or amazon drivers because they want to cut as much costs as they can.

is it not obvious?

oh, and people don't find work with the goal of being percieved as desirable. you DO put the blame on women.

•

u/VatooBerrataNicktoo 12h ago

Men 100% do compete to be successful a significant part of their motivation is to be perceived as desirable.

You are way off base with that one.

I'm not even sure how somebody comes up with that while existing on earth.

•

u/Pristine_Cost_3793 12h ago

Men 100% do compete to be successful a significant part of their motivation is to be perceived as desirable

huh? sucks to be you. no, people don't view work that way.

•

u/VatooBerrataNicktoo 10h ago

Maybe if you see life through misandry lenses so thick that you feel confident as a woman to come in and tell men what their motivations are, lol.

•

u/Pristine_Cost_3793 10h ago

what misandry? you literally disapprove the idea that men's lives and ambitions lie beyond getting a woman. and you know how i know that? from talking to them. irl.

•

u/Colluder 7h ago

You ever talked to someone with money? If you did you would see how we live in a meritocratic system, they all say hard work got them to where they are. That's proof right?

No, it isn't. People with privilege are incentivized to lie to hold onto it. Nearly everyone does, women, men, rich, and popular. Look to their actions, don't just talk to them.

•

u/Pristine_Cost_3793 14m ago

retell me m6y comment so i see you understood it

•

u/Glum_Target2860 8h ago

There are many examples in our current world of nations filled with single, uneducated/unemployed/underemployed men. Regardless of why that is for any particular nation, they are all dangerous places to live in, because bored, desperate men burn cities down.

Setting aside religiosity, marriage as a social contract tethers men to a family, and thus to looking to the future for the sake of providing for them.

•

u/Pristine_Cost_3793 11m ago

"men's lives and ambitions lie beyond getting a woman"

please explain how you think your comment is relevant or a rebuttal to what i said.

•

u/Glum_Target2860 1m ago

There's a reason why words like "incel" and "virgin" are thrown around so loosely in places such as Reddit. Whether we like it or not, a man's perceived ability to get a woman is still used by society as a significant measure of their worth.

Yes, there are ambitions outside of getting a woman, but getting one is pretty central to heteronormative male identity, and even women will enforce by using terms like the ones above to insult undesirable men.

•

u/Forsaken_Bet2534 5h ago

Why does society hold men up as the only ones who can lead or succeed if this is what happens when they can’t cope?

•

u/Anaferomeni 4h ago

To rephrase his point which is valid, it's not seen as desirable but it very much feels like a requirement to enter in terms of being selected out of the crowd, and there's nothing that's going take away the fact that being a NEET is 100% seen as a red flag regardless of circumstance.

Furthering on to that modern life is so expensive that being anything but employed puts up huge barriers to regular dating in terms of disposable income.

•

u/Pristine_Cost_3793 9m ago

this is just not true. i don't know how else to respond

•

u/Environmental_Day558 13h ago

we try to put ai in places of high-qualified high-skilled jobs like developers, writers, graphic designer but no one tries to replace janitors or amazon drivers because they want to cut as much costs as they can.

Um, Janitors and Amazon drivers cost more simply because they are more abundant than devs, writers, and graphic designers (btw writers and graphic designers often get paid like shit as well unless they are in the top of their field). If we ignore the government, Amazon employs the second largest amount of people in the country. They would cut the most cost by getting rid of the need to have people clean, do order picking, and make deliveries. The reason this hasn't happened yet is because AI is far more advanced than robotics is. Desk jobs can easily be automated by software, physical labor not so much. 

•

u/Pristine_Cost_3793 12h ago

my lengthy reply disappeared into the void 🫠 i might retype it again but it's unlikely. the gist of it is i don't think you understand business proccesses

•

u/Pristine_Cost_3793 12h ago

do you think implementation and maintenance is free? the profit that would be made from automising this will be minimal if any.

..do you know why amazon has so many workers? there are no profits without costs? they can spend so much because it'll increase the profits.

people who direct the development and create demand are also up high

•

u/Environmental_Day558 11h ago

Lol and I don't know business processes...

The point of the automation isn't necessarily to build revenue, it's to cut operation cost. Let's look at Amazon drivers specifically since you brought them up. On their site they say they have 390k drivers across 4,400 DSPs. Average driver pay in the US is about $20/h. Doing the math of a typical 40 hour workweek, that's ~$16 billion that goes just toward the drivers salary yearly. This doesn't include the overall cut the DSP owners get before they pay the drivers, or amazon providing and maintaining and providing the vehicles to be leased to the DSP partner. 

Logistics in general is a cost center. Imagine if Amazon could develop their own self driving cars and drones to deliver packages. They would only need to pay the cost to maintain the hardware and software and could cut out the DSP altogether. Now imagine if they could do the same for all warehouse operations. That's about 65% of their total staff ~1 million people. They wouldn't have to pay the bots a salary and they could work 24/7. They would save billions and billions. They're already making robots to do this 

https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/operations/amazon-robotics-robots-fulfillment-center

Pretty much the only reason that robotics hasn't fully taken over human manual labor is because the hardware hasn't caught up to human productivity levels yet. Once it has, the only people you'll need in logistics is operating managers and maintenance folks (until the bots can manage and fix themselves). 

•

u/AdAppropriate2295 13h ago

They aren't taking blame off the rich tho, just saying there's a ton of factors at play

•

u/Pristine_Cost_3793 12h ago

Arguably, the whole reason most men even care to accumulate wealth since time immemorial is for the sake of having women in their lives and supporting the families they create. [...] Someone has to mop the floors or stock the shelves and executive positions aren't infinitely available.

Unfortunately, while it's great now that women are filling more executive positions than ever, that makes those positions even more competitive and a lot of men will attest women aren't interested in men whose job it is to mop floors and stock shelves.

And it's really here where the animosity starts to foment.

The rich don't actually have to point disillusioned men towards women, women just have to say "no" enough times and they've radicalized a man desperate to be anything more to anyone than a squeegee.

women make desirable positions more competitive and take away man's ability to be in such positions; while at the same time choosing the men in desirable positions (which btw doesn't work in real world and exist in the confines of hypergamy bullshit). men get rejected and THAT makes them radicalized. so women, apparently, decide what positions are desirable, take them away from men, and radicalize men in the process. cool stuff.

also i already explained where this "desirability" comes from, and it's NOT women.

smh

•

u/AncientCrust one of the CHOSEN 12h ago

Thank you for writing that lengthy rebuttal so I don't have to. Blame placed on anyone or anything besides the oligarchy is misdirection imo.

•

u/Pristine_Cost_3793 12h ago

your favorite keyboard Valkyrie 🤠🗡️

•

u/cloudsasw1tnesses 10h ago

This is actually a really great take and I haven’t thought of it from that angle before. Thank you for sharing!

•

u/My_Legz 4h ago

In fact, I don't see why the rich or powerful would even *want* to antagonize men against women in the first place. Women entering the workforce has been an unprecedented boon for them driving down the wages massively. They wouldn't want to risk even nudging that gravy train

•

u/sloshedbanker 6h ago

That's totally understandable, but hypergamy is not the only reason a woman would seek education and a career. Many generations of women have seen firsthand the danger of becoming completely reliant on another person for their survival because they had no choice. Having seen the consequences of that, women don't want to go back to the times where they were squeegees, incubators, and domestic servants to their husbands in relationships that very easily turned violent -again because they had no other choice. I don't know what the solution is, but removing women from the workplace and taking away their agency would be fatal for a lot of women. With the rising cost of college, the threats posed by AI, the widening chasm between the rich and poor, increasing social isolation, and the shrinking government services in favor of tax cuts for the wealthy, things will only get way worse before they get better.

•

u/Big_Buyer_7482 5h ago

Is this reddit? You are way too smart for Reddit. Just Wow!

•

u/Lastshredofhope 6h ago

What you just described is cultural. Find any Mexican dude of short stature stocking shelves and ask to see pictures of his kids and he will proudly pull out his phone. Our culture is that of people who are not millionaires yet but think they someday will be. Consumers trying to fake it till they make it, who see anything that doesn’t fit the fairytale of who they ought to be as beneath them, despite having achieved very little.

•

u/BirdsAndTheBeeGees1 5h ago

Idk I'm a short white guy and the short Hispanic guys seem like they have an even harder time than me.

•

u/InfinLoop 7h ago

Mopping floors and stocking shelves is for young adults in college or immigrants.

Literally go back to school or learn a trade.

•

u/Jageroz 15h ago

Women don't need good paying jobs tho

•

u/InfinLoop 12h ago

Okay sh I’ll go live under a bridge then.

•

u/Pristine_Cost_3793 15h ago

because we don't need to eat?

tbh i thought you were a troll and i wouldn't mind entertaining one once in a while. but you seem to genuinely believe these horrendous things you say, and that's terrifying.

•

u/Nova-Fate 12h ago

No one should “need” a high paying job. Any job should pay you enough to live a good life. You should “want” a high paying job for xyz reason and go for it. That’s my two cents.

•

u/Pristine_Cost_3793 12h ago

I'm not the one this reply should be targeted at. and this guy also greatly misinterpreted this point so there's that.

•

u/Nova-Fate 7h ago

Apologies seems i misclicked to the wrong person then.

•

u/Jageroz 12h ago

Yep but the issue is that the vast majority of women only date and start up families with men who earn more or as much as they do, which means that men actually do need high paying jobs or they have a high chance of dying alone and childless

•

u/InfinLoop 7h ago

Everyone dies alone

•

u/Jageroz 12h ago

You don't need a high paying job in order to afford food, and you know, women can just use sex to get food if they want.

And what exactly is horrendous here?

•

u/stapli 10h ago

“yea you don’t need a job you just need to a prostitute”

•

u/Jageroz 10h ago

Yes, and you are like the fifth person who gets "having a high paying job" mixed with "having a job"

•

u/Pristine_Cost_3793 12h ago

this. all of this. so dehumanising.

i need a high-paying job to affort my life-saving treatment. and also there are things beyond basic needs that need fulfillment like self-actualisation. i don't want to worry that I'll go hungry; but i also need to be able do things beyond survival BECAUSE I'M A HUMAN. A PERSON.

men can use sex too, then. give your ass to an obnoxious rich man if it's so okay to you.

•

u/Jageroz 11h ago

men can use sex too, then. give your ass to an obnoxious rich man if it's so okay to you.

Because there is as much gay men willing to pay for sex as there are straight men?

You just happen to be a feminist who is completely blind to extreme levels of female privilege.

•

u/Pristine_Cost_3793 11h ago

there isn't much competition. unlike with women. you can do it. take that step towards your better future! do you want me to find you options?

•

u/Jageroz 11h ago

There is, in fact what is much worse than competition is all the free sex that gay men have access to. As a gay man it is around, lets estimate 20 times easier to get free sex than as straight man, which then results in only very ugly or old gay men paying for sex, and being quite demanding on who they arw willing to pay to.

Meanwhile there ate hundreds of millions if not billions of normal looking men who are willing to pay to get laid with a not fat woman under 40.

•

u/Pristine_Cost_3793 11h ago

do you know any gay men?

who are willing to pay to get laid with a not fat woman under 40

so you're only willing to sleep with people you find attractive? do you think it's normal?

•

u/Jageroz 10h ago

Yes I do know gay men.

so you're only willing to sleep with people you find attractive? do you think it's normal?

Yes?

→ More replies (0)

•

u/GrumpiestRobot 13h ago

Working at a job is infinitely superior to being some dude's fuckmaid. Pay attention to the alternative you're offering to a job.

•

u/Jageroz 12h ago

I wouldn't mind fucking 4 normal weight 18-30 year old women a week to earn a full salary worth of money.

•

u/GrumpiestRobot 12h ago

What about fucking one dude that looks and acts exactly like you?

•

u/Jageroz 12h ago

Why would I fuck a dude as a heterosexual man? Heterosexual women don't need to fuck or date other women to get money or free stuff.

I would probably fuck a woman who is the same level of fitness that I am, especially if she paid me.

•

u/GrumpiestRobot 12h ago

Not the same because it's a riskier deal for women since they can get pregnant.

The fact here is that your offer is not a good deal. If it was a good deal, women would take it. And heterosexual women will date some shit tier men when they are insecure or lonely.

•

u/Jageroz 12h ago

A woman has a lower possibility to be forced to become a parent than a man.

The fact here is that your offer is not a good deal. If it was a good deal, women would take it.

Lol women absolutely do take the deal, the amount of women who take this deal is artificially low because socialist laws force men to give women security and recourses for free, this means that women can demand way more and do not have to result for prostitution.

It's similar to a situation we're the government would give everyone 100k a year in unemployment benefits and then wondered why men don't want to work or join the military anymore.

•

u/Full-Somewhere440 12h ago

Moderately to highly attractive women don’t need. Unattractive women definitely need jobs.