World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
There are so few good male role models for teenage boys. I would have said John Cena at one point, but he's decided to shill for the CCP, so not him either. I honestly don't know who teenage boys can turn to at this point.
Maybe young men should build a role-model construct of good qualities they see rather than idolize a single patriarchal figure and seek to emulate them, including their flaws.
Speaking as someone who was fortunate to have a decent dad, and a decent step dad, who were radically different.
Plenty of kids do not have decent male role models in their life though. That's part of the problem. So they turn to the internet and find people like Tate.
I really have no idea how we fix that on the internet. I guess volunteer for big brothers/big sisters if you can.
The power of anonymity.
Ah right, it’s on the children to build their own role models
That isn’t a fair expectation
And why should a random snot-nosed kiddo do that while not having a role model to advise it. Sure, boys have no issue looking for role models when none are in their immediate surroundings -- but then you also run the risk of them seeing "oh, people with money are respected" (after all, capitalism and everything) and "Oh, Tate has money and is confident and is talking to me". The rest is tragedy.
...kinda generational, btw: Reportedly Tate got the way he got by seeing some guy in a Lambo or something (literally or figuratively) spitting on a mechanic or something and saying to himself that he's going to be the guy with the Lambo.
such wisdom in these words. i’ve long speculated that our lived experience growing up in a capitalist system (at least the one we’re in) severely warps our concept of admiration in peripheral but profound ways. we don’t have heros, we have brands. tate is a brand, musk is a brand, theil is a brand, as is cena and rogan and so many other influencers. because being a brand makes the vibe/essence/aesthetic being projected feel both real and posessable. it has effectively replaced our social framework for developing an identity with algorithmically profitable assimilation. values? an eye for opportunity is all you really need to be successful.
the reality is we are all beautifully flawed, with gifts and deficits that all deserve to be acknowledged in equal measure.
No one is safe from the gods we create, they all turn on us.
This is the pick yourself up by your bootstraps version of raising a child. You can't seriously expect a 12 year old to have enough wisdom and initiative to do this? Why do we have this unrealistic expectation that men are super capable and just choose to be failures? It's the same system that fails everybody else, that's also failing them
You got a solution, or anything new to add to the conversation? Or are you just going to whine like everyone else?
Cause frankly, I don't have a fix for this. At least not one that is overly authoritarian, like controlling every piece of media that is available to children, and creating a guide for what characteristics of different role models should be emulated, and what should be avoided.
Maybe at a certain point, it is up to the individual to form their own set of desirable positive characteristics and seek to incorporate those traits into themselves. We can't (or really shouldn't) just thought and content police everything for every child. They have growth and developement that the must do for themselves, no one else can do it for them.
Are you also against diverse representation in media? That's been pushed for years, and to an extent we've succeeded. There's no reason we can't do the same for male role models
Jason Momoa, Henry Cavill, Hugh Jackman, Dave Bautista, Ryan Reynolds, Guy Fieri to name a few
Hank and John Green are pretty good role models, I'd say.
How many of those are talking about how to, bluntly put, score gals and become a man you yourself respect. "Is famous, male, and not an asshole" doesn't really suffice as credentials, here.
It's almost like having the life objective to "score gals" isn't a very healthy or good goal to begin with. It's fine to be promiscuous and have lots of partners, but I don't believe the mannosphere is the way to get there.
But no one is telling them that either.
Where, from "bluntly put, score gals" (note the "bluntly") did you get to "life goal" and "promiscuous"? Unless you're ace once puberty hits you're out there trying to get laid. Either sex, everything in between and laterally. Are you trying to shame people for their biological impulses, are you from a cripplingly puritan culture or something.
I'm sorry, but most people can go through puberty without masturbating in class (something I've been unfortunate to witness). You can have a healthy view on sex even in your teenage hormone phase. That's what sex positive education is about. Those teenagers that crave sex will have it, so it's best to just educate how to be safe about it. Andrew Tate and Trump are the exact opposites of being safe and having fun. Coercing or forcing yourself upon another person is the opposite of good sex. Yes, teenagers make mistakes, but the best we can do is shut down and call Tate and co out for the absolute incels they are.
What the fuck are you on about. Why are you bringing up random shit like that. That's the sexual equivalent of smearing shit on the wall, likely due to severe personal trauma/neurosis, and definitely not something that can be addressed by internet role models. It's a case for a psychologist. It also has nothing to do with dating advise.
I don't think anyone in this whole thread disagrees. Certainly not me. What they do do though is telling you to grab em by the pussy, that's absolutely terrible advise (unless you're in an established relationship then YMMV), but it is advise and in the absence of good advise that's what some kids will latch onto.
They have desires, they have questions on how to go about fulfilling those. If they came to you and asked how to become a doctor, welder, or fashion designer, you'd probably be happy to oblige, but when it comes to finding a sexual partner? Generally, either crickets or terrible advise. From all directions. Most of my dates I got out of organically starting play fights during ordinary hanging out, and if you don't have the attitude to pull it off naturally and without thinking with your dick when doing that that's also terrible advise. But at least it's not lying about the "be nice" / "she's going to hook up with an asshole anyway" (apparent) paradox: There's a difference between harmless and peaceful. Loom like a rollercoaster: Intimidating, yes, but not dangerous. If she wants a ride, she'll get on. How did I learn that? Probably has something to do with my bigger sisters gang-tickling me.
Which, actually, brings me to another structural problem: Kids have too few siblings nowadays and at least in many countries kindergarten, daycares etc. are terrible when it comes to fostering proper social development. In the US they probably arrest 3yolds for stealing scrunchies and sentence them as adults. You don't learn conflict resolution if there's no conflicts around, you don't learn forgiveness if there's nothing people can be sorry for because everything is wrapped in sterile bubble wrap. You also don't learn it if an adult thinks forcing someone to say "sorry" is a resolution, ground zero for tokenism right there.
Defeatist. Seriously. "The best we can do"? That attitude is toxic.
Why so many actors?
Actors are generally the most well known celebrities
But we generally only see the characters they play.
5 years ago Will Smith may have been on that list.
Eh, idk, these actors have generally struck me as pretty decent people. 5 years ago we already knew Will Smith was a Scientologist.
There are good male role models. It's just that they are much, much harder to make money off.
Which bloody sucks.
I can think of several, but it's so cringe to say any of them. There's a disdain for do-gooders in all societies, but especially American society. Which means that it's just not cool to admire someone who is simply a good person.
You don't only have to look to living people:
Living People:
Idk Mark Rober has got that scam school thing going on now.
It is getting a little obnoxious. But still mostly on the good side.
What, Marcus Aurelius and Zeno (not the one who can't shoot arrows btw) but no Diogenes?
To be fair, Diogenes was a cunt of the highest order. Love his work; but not a good role model.
He was not the cunt they deserved, but the cunt they needed.
But yes don't embrace statutes.
Emperor Norton, mayhaps?
but if you pick a random guy, he's probably a better role model than tate.
Yes, but the bar really can't get much lower.
Coooooody, Cody Rhodes!
Schwarzenegger is one.