Queer Eye, Jordan Peterson and Depressed Men

[BobKowalski]

Firstly, the title of the thread is pretty much the title of this article which touches on a lot of themes, the far right, BLM, toxic masculinity, how society defines you and whether it is healthy and a bit more besides.

It’s a long read, but an interesting one. Needless to say I agree with a lot of the sentiment behind it. In summary, and this is not the first time I’ve said it, but we are going to have to learn or relearn what makes us happy. Other than signing Messi.

Queer Eye, Jordan Peterson and the battle for Depressed Men

 

[mat]

Firstly, the title of the thread is pretty much the title of this article which touches on a lot of themes, the far right, BLM, toxic masculinity, how society defines you and whether it is healthy and a bit more besides.

It’s a long read, but an interesting one. Needless to say I agree with a lot of the sentiment behind it. In summary, and this is not the first time I’ve said it, but we are going to have to learn or relearn what makes us happy. Other than signing Messi.

Queer Eye, Jordan Peterson and the battle for Depressed Men

A great piece that.

Which could act subtly as an intervention to people reading it.

 

[inbetween]

Firstly, the title of the thread is pretty much the title of this article which touches on a lot of themes, the far right, BLM, toxic masculinity, how society defines you and whether it is healthy and a bit more besides.

It’s a long read, but an interesting one. Needless to say I agree with a lot of the sentiment behind it. In summary, and this is not the first time I’ve said it, but we are going to have to learn or relearn what makes us happy. Other than signing Messi.

Queer Eye, Jordan Peterson and the battle for Depressed Men

It's a good article but it contains an annoying echo chamber trying to link political systems or the right with unhappiness which is absolute rubbish. I watch Queer Eye a lot and at no point do I think oh these guys are great oh and I wish we had a marxist political system, or we could overthrow capitalism or neo-liberalism.

The unhappiness the people on the programme feel is a product of society but not a society that is suffering due to politics or it's economic system, all society suffers by change, personal choices and alsorts of other things. Isn't it ironic that the article criticises and suffers our political systems yet the existence of Queer Eye is purely a product of liberal policies, freedom of expression and the capitalism of Netflix?

The happiest countries in the world are often the richest and have high development indexes but nothing links their political systems or ways of generating wealth. They are happy and rich because they allow freedom of opportunity but also expression and democracy in all spectrums of the political landscape.

What the left tries to do nowadays is to plant itself into the intellectual moral high ground but in a way where expression and political freedom is disallowed. It's inflexibility and unwillingness to compromise and meet in the middle then alienates the rest. That lack of centre is what results in Trump, Brexit, Boris and it wouldn't surprise me if we get Trump mk2.

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

Poorly researched bunch of twaddle, broadstroking with lazy stereotypes and a faux ideological view of how men are liberated by absolving them of personal responsibility and the laws of nature defined hierachical structures, which a certain subset of society want to unravel to put themselves at the top of a new structure to the detriment of everyone else, society's development and way of life.

 

[BobKowalski]

Continuing the theme of happiness and depression in men, here is an article from the Sunday Times.

 

[Rascal]

The happiest countries in the world are often the richest and have high development indexes but nothing links their political systems or ways of generating wealth. They are happy and rich because they allow freedom of opportunity but also expression and democracy in all spectrums of the political landscape.

What is your rationale for that statement?

Because it appears to me you are equating wealth with happiness. Its a common western trait to judge by our standards of what we think people want. That does not make it correct. Are we happier than a community of Buddihist Monks, a village of Eskimo fisherman, a nomadic Tuareg camel herder, are we really?

 

[BobKowalski]

What is your rationale for that statement?

Because it appears to me you are equating wealth with happiness. Its a common western trait to judge by our standards of what we think people want. That does not make it correct. Are we happier than a community of Buddihist Monks, a village of Eskimo fisherman, a nomadic Tuareg camel herder, are we really?

Wealth doesn’t equate to happiness. It just makes your misery more comfortable.

I don‘t have any answers to this. I‘m just wondering if we need to evaluate how we judge happiness and question how society judges our worth as people, men and women, and how society reinforces mental rigidity by forcing us into roles or patterns of behaviour that make mental issues worse.

It‘s worthy of discussion in my opinion.

 

[Rascal]

Wealth doesn’t equate to happiness. It just makes your misery more comfortable.

I don‘t have any answers to this. I‘m just wondering if we need to evaluate how we judge happiness and question how society judges our worth as people, men and women, and how society reinforces mental rigidity by forcing us into roles or patterns of behaviour that make mental issues worse.

It‘s worthy of discussion in my opinion.

I would argue capitalism inflicts misery on far more people than it makes content. The rat race, the rigidity of conformity to capitalist norms such as owning a house all add to pressures on happiness. Now we have the overwhelming call from the capitalist class for people to return to the office environment, is there any indicator that this makes them more productive or indeed happier or is it capitalist economic necessity that people have to sacrifice their individual happiness for the collective economic good.

There are obviously people very happy under capitalism, there are people who live to work and if that makes them happy then fair play to them, but for the man on a zero hours contract worru=yig how he is going to feed his kids capitalism aint much fun.

 

[blueinsa]

I would argue capitalism inflicts misery on far more people than it makes content. The rat race, the rigidity of conformity to capitalist norms such as owning a house all add to pressures on happiness. Now we have the overwhelming call from the capitalist class for people to return to the office environment, is there any indicator that this makes them more productive or indeed happier or is it capitalist economic necessity that people have to sacrifice their individual happiness for the collective economic good.

There are obviously people very happy under capitalism, there are people who live to work and if that makes them happy then fair play to them, but for the man on a zero hours contract worru=yig how he is going to feed his kids capitalism aint much fun.

It isn't perfect, we all know that but far more misery?

You will be asked with an opinion like that what is the alternative and of course, examples of a true socialist country where people are genuinely happier and better off?

 

[BobKowalski]

I would argue capitalism inflicts misery on far more people than it makes content. The rat race, the rigidity of conformity to capitalist norms such as owning a house all add to pressures on happiness. Now we have the overwhelming call from the capitalist class for people to return to the office environment, is there any indicator that this makes them more productive or indeed happier or is it capitalist economic necessity that people have to sacrifice their individual happiness for the collective economic good.

There are obviously people very happy under capitalism, there are people who live to work and if that makes them happy then fair play to them, but for the man on a zero hours contract worru=yig how he is going to feed his kids capitalism aint much fun.

The thing about capitalism is its naked self interest. The Govt may be calling for ‘a return to offices’ but if business can make the same returns by employees working from home then they will happily leave them at home.

Capitalism is a pure base line, almost egalitarian and is the enemy of social conservatism. Gay marriage is a positive economic return, more big events, halls being hired, florists and cake makers etc have more business. Women working means more people with spare cash to spend, again a positive economic return. Social conservatism hates these developments. Social conservatism hates any developments that sees those that have little, have more. Especially if those that have little ’look different’.

Repressing a class of people is not a capitalist move, it’s a social conservatism move allied to racism. Having an underclass of people is not in capitalism‘s interests. Capitalism is powered by the free circulation of money, people, goods, services etc. The more people that ‘have’, then the more people you have spending and spending is capitalism.

Brexit is anti-capitalism, its aims are restrict trade and people. It’s isolationist and protectionist, hence the big argument with the EU over State Aid, although France and Germany are aiming to extend furlough schemes whereas we are still on course to end ours, and if that’s isn’t State Aid I don’t know what is. Part of our conflicting messages over Brexit is the war over competing instincts. The desire for free and open trade vs our dislike of foreigners. Capitalism vs Social Conservatism.