Well, he’s already divorced from reality
What a fucking joke, he wouldn’t know masculine energy if it roughly penetrated him from behind whilst lovingly whispering in his ear what a good boy he was.
The fact that a load of billionaires are now embracing the far right to protect their arses sure seems like a familiar theme.
It’s crazy that they could lose 90% of everything and still have more than 99.999% of the population of the planet, yet they keep fighting to make sure they have more and more and even more.
I think the mistake here is thinking it’s about “things” or material objects. Most people interface with money at a basic level: you can buy a new jacket, reliable car, a sizeable home, etc. However, at the level that you are with these billionaires, it’s no longer about having things or owning things. It’s about having more power to do things.
For example, there’s are some fun little calculators where you can calculate all the things that some could spend their money on https://neal.fun/spend/ https://www.spend-elon-fortune.com/
At this point it’s an imperialist kind of mindset, where you want to own multiple corporations, properties, and show it off to your wealthy colleagues that you are the best at X. It’s probably not unlike how professional athletes will destroy their bodies with steroids to become the best in the world, just the negatives are externalized.
It’s a mental illness. They have to have more power, if not money…
“To speak of ‘limits to growth’ under a capitalistic market economy is as meaningless as to speak of limits of warfare under a warrior society.”
- Murray Bookchin
Can anyone who upvoted this explain what’s actually wrong with Zuck’s comment?
"Masculine energy I think is good, and obviously society has plenty of that, but I think that corporate culture was really trying to get away from it […] It’s like you want feminine energy, you want masculine energy […] I think that that’s all good. But I do think the corporate culture sort of had swung toward being this somewhat more neutered thing,
It’s nonsense.
Ok but you can’t explain what’s wrong with the comment?
It’s easy to get offended and think it’s wrong, but considering my comment is at +1/-6 yet no one has actually explained what’s wrong reinforces my belief it’s actually sensible. Something that’s obvious nonsense can be debunked with no effort, yet here we are
I’m not gonna get into it with sea lioning.
A good start would be defining what those words mean to him and to his company.
For instance, given nothing but the recent news about Meta and the quote from the OP, it sounds to me like Zuckerberg thinks “masculine energy” means “act overtly bigoted, and punch down whenever you can.”
I’m a man, and I like to act masculine in the “help those around you” way rather than the racist, napoleon complex “I am a strong boy because I offend people and I have good taste because I hate everything” way. And I don’t appreciate him putting more negativity on the word than there already was!
Its ironic because theyre trying to project masculinity without doing anything worth a fuck. If zuck wanted respect he would have done something beneficial with his position like a real man.
It has the vibes of run-of-the-mill toxic masculinity trying to categorize behaviors based on gender and then make it subtly clear that only the masculine category is good and acceptable, or in his words, not “neutered”.
Or at least that’s how understand the outrage but it doesn’t mean that’s exactly what he’s saying because his statement is plausibly deniable. He needs to clarify (but does he really, given his latest activity around prez Musk & Co.?).
CEO’s finding rationale for company poor performace.
I cannot think of a bigger cuck move than bending over to court bad faith actors and suckling at king maga’s sweaty little man nipples for $$
I hate everything about this comment, but you’re not wrong.
You’re on a website where people come out of the woodwork to defend “ethical polyamory” and the biggest cuck you can think of is a CEO trying to curry political favor with the current US president?
…, Being poly doesn’t make you a cuck
I like the thought of masculine and feminine energies wafting around like medieval miasmas.
This guy is smart.
Up next: the return of the humoral theory of medicine!
All these feminine airs have my cholera up. I’m going to go poison myself and barf a lot.
Make sure to avoid mustard!
I hope she takes half his stuff.
Divorce and/or testosterone supplementation roting brains
Hah! Imagine all these unregulated supplements causing neurotoxicity, later to be worsened by Trump defunding the FDA.
The FDA is too strong of a brand, they won’t defund or eliminate, they’ll just replace entire staff with sycophants and lower standards so that all kinds of snake oil (that administration has a “taste” of) becomes “FDA Approved” so the AI can sell it to incels on twitter and facebook. And ultimately when editing is “FDA APPROVED” then NOTHING is FDA Approved. The next 4 - 20 years are going to continue to be a push to break confidence in American institutions, to make America a weaker and weaker player (and a bigger joke) on the international stage. All so that they have less influence in world affairs (I.e. Ukraine, Israel, etc).
He’s right about one thing: There is a serious lack of actual masculinity among our leaders.
Most public figures who try to present some form of “masculinity” are just desperate and petty, willing to sacrifice nothing to earn their status, and eager to degrade others to look better by comparison.
A real man produces more than he needs, but takes only that much and ensures the rest goes to those who are less able to sustain themselves. They protect the defenseless, elevate those who are ignored, and invest in a future they won’t personally live to enjoy.
Show me a real man among you. It’s not femininity keeping you from finding one. It’s your own greed and hubris.
There is a serious lack actual masculinity among our leaders.
The problem is many people hear these words and instantly jump to toxic masculinity. Which you’re obviously not advocating for, but neither of us are “many people”.
Masculinity has been defined as toxic by default for many.
Yup. It is in most or at least many cases.
deleted by creator
A real man produces more than he needs
And I’m an imaginary man producing just what I need. 👻
The answer is often more complex
The answer is clearly 42i
I wish I were able to achieve even 0.01% of this, I am just born unable.
It’s ok. It’s going to suck. Real men and women could provide for you. Not that you’re not a real woman/man, but in context.
Thanks, but sadly I think there are no real men/women near me.
Either this comment is also misogynistic as all hell, or my mother was very masculine.
Masculinity isn’t just for men. Just like femininity isn’t just for women. A healthy person has a mix of these qualities, along with many others that we don’t tend to align with a specific gender.
When I say “a real man”, I don’t mean it as an objective assessment to stick a person neatly into one of two piles. That’s not how gender works, and it’s not how being a person in general works.
What I mean is that if you’re indulging in behavior like belittling other people for fun or “cool points”, or using your power or physical strength to get what you want, and calling that “being a man”, then your idea of manhood is a mirage. If you want to aspire to something based on your male gender identity, aspire to humility, vigilance, and service to others. Those are great qualities that anyone can have, but they’re especially important for men if we’re gonna have a respectful and productive society.
It is still misogynistic to say that women who manifest those behaviors are particularly masculine. Those are adult human behaviors.
I don’t know a lot of adult humans who behave that way of either gender.
When I was in the military, the best Marines weren’t the ones who could lift the most or run the fastest (though sometimes they did), they were the ones who stayed up late writing up their junior Marines for awards, the ones who skipped their own lunch to teach their squad or platoon how to perform better, and just generally the ones who went out of their own way to improve everyone else’s well-being around them, and all the while keeping their mouth shut up how much they were doing for everyone else.
The whole master-apprentice thing is not really found in America anymore. It is lowkey there in academia, but there is so much admin work that even good PIs struggle. I have not really seen it in my little private industry experience. And I have no public experience to comment.
It does exist in some trades still but that’s also becoming more rare. My father was a farmer and he was always willing to be a mentor to guys he knew who wanted to get into that industry and was willing to help out his neighbor farmers if they needed help. When he died about 10 years ago, all the local farmers came out to help and they helped my family harvest his last crop at no charge to us. Wish that was the way it was in other private sector industries.
This comment makes me want to read “the way of kings” again…
Kaladin is a G. Currently on Oathbringer. I enjoy a good fantasy series, just hate when I run out of books.
Real men are also able to access their emotions, express their needs(both emotional and physical), develop and share empathy, and nurture deep relationships within their community.
Though i would argue none of what either of us said has to do with gender.
Relentlessly locking your own humanity away behind a strong man facade built on shame is one of the biggest reason these fuckers become so hateful and make “manliness” seem like such a putrid prospect.
A real man produces more than he needs, but takes only that much and ensures the rest goes to those who are less able to sustain themselves.
A big part of the issue is men constantly being told that they are responsible for everything. So this attitude would only make the problem worse.
This is why a positive kind of masculinity also needs to reject patriarchy and capitalism.
“Producing more than you take” doesn’t have to mean money. (Though I did mean money in my original comment, cuz Zuck is a greedy monster.)
Just listening to people more than you demand to be listened to. Doing chores that you know your friends and family hate. Sharing your knowledge. Cooking. Fixing things. There are so many ways you can contribute to your group that don’t take money, and don’t even take much time.
Being financially responsible and helping people when you can is important, don’t get me wrong.
But seeing your worth in purely financial terms is really limiting and unhealthy for the individual, and also tends to create perverse hierarchies inside of families.
Those aren’t unique to men though (except your last paragraph), how is that not general advice?
I think our advice to men should be more:
“Your problems matter”
Or
“Standing on your own two feet (and autonomy) is especially important to most men, so we should change our economy to support that”
I’ve noticed most advice given to men usually boils down to more responsibility or expectation instead of actually giving them something like male specific support programs.
Right but take what you just said to it’s logical conclusion. Why should only men have those responsibilities? All you’ve really done is create a different, nicer patriarchy, that still expects men to conform to specific gender roles and still expects women to conform to specific gender roles. Consider the inverse, all the people who physically can’t produce more than they require to survive, who need additional attention or care, through no fault of their own. Can those people not be men?
You’ve described just a generally good person, and realistically you’ve described more women than you have men. The goal should be to get rid of the idea that certain responsibilities are reserved for certain genders completely.
He knows he’ll never make up the loss of subscribers on the left since he’s burned those bridges so he has to double down on the far right to carry his platform.
This way he gets to compete with X for a race to the bottom and see who can gather the most shitbags to support their plateauing businesses.
“he has to” does he though? He has enough money for him and his entire lineage to live lavishly for eternity. He can dip out today and stop working forever, relax on a beach, and disconnect from the world like Tom from MySpace did.
He’s not being forced to do anything.
Listen to the latest zuck episode of jre and he actually sounds pretty reasonable. I know that’s crazy but if you have a couple hours you can actually listen to the dude.
Edit: just to be clear I’m not saying I love the guy, or even like him. But listening to him talk for 2 hours he is atleast semi intelligent and is trying to keep free speech alive.
sitting through any length of jre is going to either waste your time or expose you to hours of garbage.
why?
The rhetoric of the right has shown time and time again that they will use disinformation and misinformation to conform their gullible audience towards whatever views suit their needs. Humanity continues to confirm his remarkable susceptible to this practice. This form of deceitful expression is not the ‘free speech’ a society should tolerate and why fact checking entities need to exist with the power to shutdown this discourse.
If you’re not willing to listen to it then stfu
You are just as bad as the right wingers you criticize all day. You don’t even watch the thing you just assume. You are the other side of the coin you constantly criticize and hate.
Zucklefuckle regularly lies and shifts about as much as a chameleon. His goal is to raise shareholder value and nothing more. He’s not worth listening to.
A down vote. Wow lmao shows how stuck in your ways you are. You’re just as bad as the right wing you hate.
lol no. Anyone who has paid any attention to Zuckerberg over the last 15 or so years will tell you the exact same thing: The dude is a lying opportunist who will say and do anything to bump his company stock. Musk and or Rogan are not your friends, they are feeding you bull shit.
I wasn’t talking about musk. Rogan is just a doofus with a show that I happen to enjoy but he himself will tell you he’s an idiot when it comes to almost anything that doesn’t include comedy or MMA of which I am a gigantic fan of both those things. Also yes, zuck is a business owner and nothing else. He wants his business to be the largest/most successful one, like every other business owner on earth. He just happens to be at the top. But I would expect him to be ruthless when it comes to running to his business, we live in a capatalisic society unfortunately don’t hate the player hate the game. I don’t think zuck has any personal responsibility to teach users right from wrong. He only had the reposibility of keeping his company making billions of dollars.
Rogan is just a doofus with a show that I happen to enjoy but he himself will tell you he’s an idiot when it comes to almost anything that doesn’t include comedy
And yet he routinely makes declarative statements like “climate science is people making you feel bad about your impact when we don’t even understand the science behind it”. He’s a right wing shill who consistently presents far right ideas like they’re truth, but then tongue in cheeks self deprecates, like it cancels out the massive soap box alt right haranguing he just did. He also consistently platforms far right racist, science denying fascists and then nods along while they drip venom in the ear of his brain-dead audience.
Zuckface’s refusal to take any responsibility for his company has gotten a lot of people killed all in the name of shareholder profits. Stop licking his boots. He has thrown you to the wolves along with the rest of us and you’re defending this dude who doesn’t even care who you are or that you even exist… seriously, why? You should also take the hint: A lot of people here, the people who are not being naive and see who he is, disagree with you.
If you’re not willing to listen to it then you’re part of the problem and you should stfu. Hate when people just for an opinion and haven’t even watched the fuckin thing. You are your own worst enemy you people
You are the other side of the coin you are criticising you knob.
The Billionares are not your friends.
That would mean listening to Joe Rogan, and unfortunately I’d be too busy setting my hair on fire before I ever listened to Joe Rogan.
I actually have listened to Zuckface on a podcast once because I had never heard him talk. He definitely does some good masking as being a human person. And I think if he wasn’t evil he might have some interesting ideas, sure.
If you’re not gonna listen to it then just say so. You’re part of the problem and shouldn’t even reply since you have no clue what you are talking about. You didn’t even listen to thing your commenting about. Do you not see the problem.
Well no I’m not going to listen to 3 hours of intellectual dark web bros. But I did read this wonderful Bluesky fact check thread of what Zuckerberg had to say, which is much more what we should be listening to, instead of Rogan shooting the shit about how climate change isn’t real with Mel Gibson . https://bsky.app/profile/mmasnick.bsky.social/post/3lfgh7dbglk2d
Mel Gibson is insane Joe was trying to convince him of evolution and climate change.
Edit: see what you did right there that’s called misinformation.
Um Mel Gibson sat there and said ivermectin is the cure for cancer and old Joe agreed. That’s actually going to kill people. Please stop listening to Joe Rogan.
No he wasn’t, his statement was about disliking being made to feel bad about climate science he doesn’t understand. You’re clearly deep in the Joe mental gymnastics brain rot.
Shows me how smart you are. I don’t agree down vote! You didn’t even watch thing or reply with a reasonable comment. You’re not willing to. You are just as bad as the right wing you hate.
Watched the episode. Completely disagree. His whole schtick was “yeah moderation is really hard yet super important to get right, that’s why as a cost cutting measure we are curtailing the entire operation lol.”
He explained it wasn’t even about the cost. Yes it’s expensive but he willing to throw billions at it for years. It’s not working and that’s the problem.
And you believed him
About what? He’s not saying anything unbelievable.
“It’s not about cost.” Running an imperfect system expensively is not grounds to gut the system entirely.
I don’t believe it’s not about cost and in my opinion you’re silly to believe it. You fell for propaganda and even worse it was propaganda on Joe Rogan of all places lmao.
Okay agree to disagree. I think meta is a company/business and obviously is looking at cost vs impact etc. And they deemed it to expensive to continue fighting a losing battle. If you don’t like it don’t use meta which I’m sure you don’t. But I don’t blame them at all for coming to this decision and I don’t think they are responsible to teach you right from wrong either. Like I said it’s not their fault a third of the world uses their services everyday. They made a great social media site and its become one of if not the most popular on earth. But that’s all they are, a social media business. I wouldn’t blame a smaller business that came to similar conclusions that just impact less people. It happens all the time it’s just I think meta gets all the attention because it’s the biggest one. But it’s still just a company making money at the end of the day.
That’s why everybody should migrate to smaller platforms - The internet is decentralized by design and people use these stupid sites that swallow personal data and regurgitate propaganda.
Just regulate that they’re legally responsible for the content they host. If their platform is too big for them to police then they need to shrink it or shut it down.
Fuck yeah, here’s hoping she’s like MacKenzie Scott ( bezos’ ex) and takes half his money and donates it all away.
Don’t donate it, buy more politicians to do good things.
Like when trump kicks it from too many hamberders and adderall, we can buy Vance to come back to the light?
There’s a lot to choose from
Is Zuck getting divorced?
I don’t think so, but don’t let that stop you from shooting your shot if your believe you can make him a happy man.
There has got to be better sexbot models out there.
LOL I would never! Unless it’s to get close enough to et tu brutus him
Dude loves Romans that much he would die proud I think.
The gender identity of your work places energy is not the damn problem. Raise the damn pay. People will work in a sewer if you paid enough.
People working in a sewer should be paid the most.
I think meta pays pretty well
I hate this, because the idea comes from Hermetic spirituality, but from a very cherry picked version of it that basically says “Be as shitty a person as you want, give into your natural inclinations and vices”
I know because I’ve seen this A LOT!
Because the actual Seventh Principle of Hermeticism does not say to do this, it actually says to balance the masculine and feminine within yourself to acknowledge both as being geniunely within you. It also encourages that the two shouldn’t be seen as opposites but rather two endpoints on a vast spectrum, the same way we see hot and cold.
But sadly too many “Gurus” somehow warped this into
“Reject femininity, see it as weakness, and be a massive chauvinistic asshole.”
When that couldn’t be further from what it’s saying.
So I watched the entire three hour interview.
Technically speaking, Zuckerberg emphasizes the need for balance. He on multiple times either emphasizes that both men and women should feel comfortable in corporate environments, and explicitly says something like “there has to be a balance” on at least two occasions.
The issue is that other parts of the interview don’t really match that idea of balance. Zuckerberg and Rogan spent like a third of the entire interview talking about bro culture stuff. I’m not even talking about “bro culture in the context of corporate America”. Rogan spends like a full ten minutes lecturing Zuckerberg on the proper way to bow hunt.
Overall I think the media is focusing outrage bait while ignoring the serious implications of the interview. Zuckerberg is clearly lobbying the Trump administration to prevent meta and other US tech companies from being subject to EU regulatory security. It has serious implications both as a consumer and in terms of geopolitics.
I really wish CEOs would stop and ask “If I wasn’t the CEO, would I want this regulation to exist?”
But that requires them to have empathy.
I hate outrage bait, as you pointed out it makes us blind to the REAL danger, which is… Zuckerberg trying to get out of playing by the rules.
I agree. Ironically he also went on a bit of a rant about how the traditional media outlets whittle down interviews to the most salacious bits, and that’s part of the reason the American public is slowly losing trust in them.
While the reason for him saying this is to discredit his previous perception as robotic, he’s also not wrong. All the articles I read “highlighting” the interview hyper focused on a few lines, and in doing so left and incomplete or dishonest impression.
