World News

It's not censorship, it's curation.

Now we've got rapists, predators and misogynists telling young boys how the world works. Trying to isolate them from society to make money off of them. To make it easier, it's like gambling: it influences underdeveloped brains much more than developed brains. That's why there's an age limit, just like with alcohol.

Yes we should have some sort of censorship. The vast, vast majority of people understand and see the bullshit these people are peddling. But some don't, and that ends up hurting innocent people. Why the fuck would you argue we should facilitate behaviour like this? https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/online-groups-pressuring-youth-self-harm-1.7107885

1. It was based on a real life person who was black, not white: The creator addressed it and said it was intentional. He did it out of concerns that people who see it as a race issue versus a gender issue. He thought it would widen the audience.
2. Why a middle class kid: Same reason as above. He wanted to show that a "Good" kid from a "Good" family could find themselves being harmed by red pill content.
3. Why is it about "incels?" : Yes, that main case was about an older boy/teen/man, but there have been a rise in UK stabbings and sexual assault of kids by kids. It's not specifically about incels, but the culture that's creating them.
4. They're trying to say that men are just evil: No, they are not. It's literally trying to do the opposite. It's trying to show that these men and boys are not just evil for evils sake, or born with it, but that the ideas are fed and nurtured through family, friends, social media, etc. It showing that even a really good kid from a good family can be made into something twisted if their nursed on this kind of content.
5. How come women get away with this but men don't: It's a result of the patriarchy. Because women are seen as lesser, even their crimes are seen as lesser (think of female teachers that "have sex" with students). Women are weak, so if you're hurt by a woman, you're weak. You were beat up by your girlfriend? Pussy, it's not like she was a guy. He probably did something wrong, Yada, Yada, Yada. Those ideals shield some women from rightful punishment and block men from getting justice and care. (that's actually very feminist of this video!)
6. This had nothing to do with the mansosphere or red pill content, it's judt a hit piece on men: Men =/= red pill. The content is for men, but not all men consume it. The idea that this young man in the show who was lying about his relationships, pleading to know if the therapist liked him, went after a girl thinking she'd be "weak" enough after having her nudes shared (and thinking the guy that sent them messed up because he should have gotten more first), and then stabbing her to death when he was still rejected is the result of those toxic teachings. He even called himself a good guy because he didn't touch her, even though he killed her.

Being held accountable can feel like an attack, but I hope you move past that initial anger. The show is actually very sympathetic towards the boy and his family. The show runner made the show to bring attention to the pressure cooker we are keeping men and boys in in the name of being masculine. Instead of thinking of it as a hit piece, think of it more of a man to man talk.

Why do you think it's a generalization on boys rather than a denunciation of the negative impact of masculinists on boys?

It's a crime and terrible, but it's not terrorism (ie. Violence for political ends). Terrorism laws allow the government to do all kinds of stuff like searches without warrants and extended pre-trial detention. It's good that they're taking these crimes seriously, but the terrorism units should stay far away from this (and should be abolished entirely, ideally).

And go after the influencers for incitement of crimes. If what Andrew Tate and others are publishing is causing people to do this, they should be locked up.