Soy Product Consumption and Political Orientation - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Polls on politics, news, current affairs and history.

How does your soya product consumption correlate with your political orientation?

I eat soy products very often and I self-identify as a leftist
3
9%
I eat soy products rarely or never and I self-identify as a leftist
12
35%
I eat soy products very often and I am not a leftist
2
6%
I eat soy products rarely or never and I am not a leftist
12
35%
other
5
15%
#14864575
SolarCross wrote:That you call masculinity "toxic" and associate it with negative things like bullying is what makes you self-hating. It is like a jew who believes in negative stereotypes of jews being nefarious or greedy, is said to be a self-hating jew.

This kind of literature is produced by really toxic people, actually deranged people. It is worthless.

If you became a self-hating man from reading shit like that, then that is all the more reason to avoid it.


Doubling down on your errors is not an argument.

Also, refusing to read sources is also not an argument.

For the record, the phrase “toxic masculinity”is not supposed to be a description of all masculinity. It is used to separate those traditionally masculine traits that have negative impacts from those traditionally masculine traits that do not,

For example, building things with your own two hands is considered traditionally masculine, but is not toxic. Beating your wife is considered traditionally masculine and is toxic because it has a negative impact.
#14864577
mikema63 wrote:Toxic masculinity is not the idea that masculinity is toxic, it points to more specific things considered masculine that are toxic like the social expectation some people have that being masculine means doing stuff like catcalling or being homophobic.


Cat-calling isn't a social expectation, just the opposite it is considered to be impolite or rude.

Homophobia is more of a christian / abrahamic thing in origin, it doesn't a have a masculinist origin if there even is such a thing. Both men and women will joke about it or have negative views about it.
#14864584
mikema63 wrote:It takes a rather willful level of ignorance to not see how those things are reinforced by cultural expectations of people about what being masculine means.

That's not why they do it though. Literally no builder in the world says "hello darling, show us your tits" to a woman walking by because it is socially expected of him. He is in fact defying social norms, and he is doing it exactly to defy social norms, out of mischievousness. The wilful ignorance is your own.
#14864585
Except that everyone he knows does it and he learned that behavior from somewhere. Particularly just the general attitude towards women that allows that behavior.

Many men who catcall have been ask afterwords about their behavior and saw nothing wrong with it. You are asserting that it defies a social norm but that isn't justified by any sort of evidence.

Your willful ignorance is in ignoring their behavior by asserting something that is clearly untrue without even bothering to support it because you have some general feeling that catcalling is a social taboo despite the fact that men egg each other on and approve of the behavior.
#14864589
mikema63 wrote:Except that everyone he knows does it and he learned that behavior from somewhere. Particularly just the general attitude towards women that allows that behavior.

Many men who catcall have been ask afterwords about their behavior and saw nothing wrong with it. You are asserting that it defies a social norm but that isn't justified by any sort of evidence.

Your willful ignorance is in ignoring their behavior by asserting something that is clearly untrue without even bothering to support it because you have some general feeling that catcalling is a social taboo despite the fact that men egg each other on and approve of the behavior.


11 People Who Cat Call Women On The Street Explain Why They Do It
#14864593
Number one was because he knows other guys who do it. Yeah totally not a socially reinforcing behavior. :lol:

Number 4 answer "because we're all dudes"

Number 9 explicitly states that it's because he sees it as culturally acceptable and supported to degrade women.

The rest hardly express their deep remorse about going against some imaginary social norm.

Did you even read the thing you posted? :lol:
#14864600
mikema63 wrote:Number one was because he knows other guys who do it. Yeah totally not a socially reinforcing behavior. :lol:

Number 4 answer "because we're all dudes"

Number 9 explicitly states that it's because he sees it as culturally acceptable and supported to degrade women.

The rest hardly express their deep remorse about going against some imaginary social norm.

Did you even read the thing you posted? :lol:


yes I read it but you didn't get it.

Who is the society providing the norms? It used to be Christians, Christians determined the norms and they determined against lewdness, both catcalling and homosexuality. The Christians have lost their grip on society and no one has replaced them as cultural arbiters. For this reason both cat-calling and homosexuality are a rebellion against norms because no new norm enforcers have replaced the Christians. Thus Christian norms remain as standard even while they are depreaciated and considered legacy norms.
Last edited by SolarCross on 21 Nov 2017 17:48, edited 1 time in total.
#14864651
SolarCross wrote:That's not why they do it though. Literally no builder in the world says "hello darling, show us your tits" to a woman walking by because it is socially expected of him.


Nope. Builders do it not because they think they should, but because they want to let the other guys know how manly they are, and because they know that they will get away with it. Society will simply shrug and say “boys will be boys”, and “constructions guys are usually like that!”.

He is in fact defying social norms, and he is doing it exactly to defy social norms, out of mischievousness. The wilful ignorance is your own.


You literally chose a social norm (i.e. construction guys cat call women) as an example of defying social norms.

SolarCross wrote:11 People Who Cat Call Women On The Street Explain Why They Do It


Fell free to quote the relevant text.

SolarCross wrote:yes I read it but you didn't get it.

Who is the society providing the norms?


Our current male dominated society.

It used to be Christians, Christians determined the norms and they determined against lewdness, both catcalling and homosexuality. The Christians have lost their grip on society and no one has replaced them as cultural arbiters. For this reason both cat-calling and homosexuality are a rebellion against norms because no new norm enforcers have replaced the Christians. Thus Christian norms remain as standard even while they are depreaciated and considered legacy norms.


While there are Christian roots to modern sexism, this whole paragraph seems like hogwash.
#14864696
SolarCross wrote:Do you think there should be a dominant group that sets and enforces social norms for everyone? Who should that be if not Christians? What norms would they enforce?


No, there should be no dominant group.

Christians can partake in the ongoing moral debate but should not automatically control the denate.

Different groups would enforce different norms for different reasons.

I notice you have no rebuttals for my argument about catcalling construction guys.

Also: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_masculinity
#14864705
Pants-of-dog wrote:No, there should be no dominant group.

Christians can partake in the ongoing moral debate but should not automatically control the denate.

Different groups would enforce different norms for different reasons.

I notice you have no rebuttals for my argument about catcalling construction guys.

Also: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_masculinity

What happens when different groups try to enforce norms which conflict with each other? Say for example Islamists and Gay rights activists?
#14864739
So this was your argument?

Pants-of-dog wrote:Nope. Builders do it not because they think they should, but because they want to let the other guys know how manly they are, and because they know that they will get away with it. Society will simply shrug and say “boys will be boys”, and “constructions guys are usually like that!”.
#14864838
Victoribus Spolia wrote:There have been several videos on this topic posted by new right youtubers in the past week. Soy is correlated with the unnatural production of estrogen in boys and makes them more effeminate. Given that the political values of the left are anti-patriarchal and that leftist ideas, espcially on immigration, are disproportionately favored by women, I suppose it stands to reason that leftist males may be more effeminate and that this may be related to flooding of the market with soy products, in the west, in the last 30 + years.

The study you supply later as proof isn't really proof at all. The only thing that lowers sex drive and sperm counts significantly is male obesity. And soy products can help you with this.

Likewise, it's simply bad science to suggest that soy causes leftwing attitudes when the inverse is so obviously the reason for the relationship - Leftwingers are far more likely to be vegetarian.
#14864848
Another thing is some body builders buy / consume it in pretty huge quantities as it is a cheap source of protein. If you go to health food shops you can find big tubs of body builder protein formula, the more expensive stuff is basically made from whey which is animal protein but the cheaper stuff is made from soy. I suppose if soy had that effect then at least a minority of bodybuilders (those on a budget) would be getting all femmed up. I think that would be noticed.

The BBC is pushing the US State Dept's point of vi[…]

Syrian war thread

The sheepdog meets its master, the sapper who retu[…]

Right Wing Marxism?

Is it possible to be a right-wing Marxist? I've be[…]

Have you revised your precious views on this? ;)[…]