• 🇬🇧󠁿 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
    European & African
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • EADD Moderators: axe battler | Pissed_and_messed

Men, let's stop talking about fuckers like Tate. Instead, lets talk about who/what a man should be.

someguyontheinternet said:
As far as I know a lot of Jung's work is now seen as pseudoscientific so I don't know why on earth you would quote him as fact
Click to expand...

In any psychology program, Jung and Freud are still taught. They are just properly positioned in their eras. Jung wasn't a scientist, he was a psychologist, so your statement is meaningless.
 
Yea they're taught in 100 and 200 level classes so students know the history, not as correct or useful theories

Are you aware that psychology is a science?
 
Anyone with 1mil dollar is like this.

even you if you had

and dont give me jack sparrow goes to hospital to make kids jump up down video more so to mirror some often met narcissism caliber
 
Foreigner said:
Not sure what you're trying to say here?

The extreme right and extreme left both endorse censorship. You're not really countering what I'm saying by stating that the other side does it.
Click to expand...
Banning books and controlling the content that elementary school students have access to in public school libraries are not the same thing anyways but that doesn't stop the nuts from conflating it with Nazis burning books.
 
wheresthefun said:
Hi everyone.

First: This is a big FUCK YOU AND DIE! to all the real & wannabe rapists like Andrew Tate and the suckers that follow his toxic messages. Im NOT asking for your "opinion" here and I will fight people like you with everything I have, always, everywhere. Keep your shit out of this thread, you're not welcome here and we all see as what you are: pathetic losers.

To all the others: Id like to start a discussion regarding healthy, non-toxic masculinity. As we've seen in the thread about Tate (and everywhere in the "real world"), there are many guys that need orientation.
The world has changed. What was accepted and encouraged a few years-decades ago has now luckily lost its "worth", many traits that were seen as masculine and appropriate in different times are now finally recognized and called out as toxic, wrong, dangerous. That leaves many men in some kind of vacuum, lots of us struggle with their sexual identity.
How do we take care of ourselves, how can we state and satisfy our needs without hurting and suppressing others?
How can we stand our ground without becoming inconsiderate pricks?
How much aggression is ok, in what situations, where is the middle ground between standing up for my self and for my values vs. being someone people spit on?
How tolerant should I be when faced with behaviors I despise?
What makes a man a man?

(This is about harm reduction, too. Men are statistically much more prone to addiction, self-harm, suicide, violence than women and im sure this is because of toxic role models.)

Hoping for a positive, interesting discussion. Thanks!
Click to expand...
I sense so much hate in your post. Tate actually has good ideas, sure he's not perfect and I don't agree with everything he says. But there's a lot of things that he says which are on point.
 
nznity said:
I sense so much hate in your post. Tate actually has good ideas, sure he's not perfect and I don't agree with everything he says. But there's a lot of things that he says which are on point.
Click to expand...

Totally. I've almost been keeping my distance from this thread precisely because there's there's much hate going on without any really decent arguments for it. Then you engage in discussion with it and wind up up a sore head. Just brainwashed by the mainstream media.
 
elgoucho9 said:
Totally. I've almost been keeping my distance from this thread precisely because there's there's much hate going on without any really decent arguments for it. Then you engage in discussion with it and wind up up a sore head. Just brainwashed by the mainstream media.
Click to expand...
Whatever. I'd rather listen to Tate than buy all that gay agenda bullshit. That's actual media brainwashing.
 
Same people who were the first to buy the government official narrative on covid are the same ones who had 4 boosters, believe the latest climate change bullshit, and hate on Tate. They are essentially triggered by main stream media. Then they'll tell other people they're the ones who've been radicalised.
 
From what I've seen and read about the case against him it seems to be really flimsy and falling apart so the whole labeling him a rapist and human trafficker seems to be a bit of a knee jerk reaction and contempt before prior investigation. Last I remember we had judicial process before conviction.

Not saying he's a great guy and should be idolized and mimicked but I also wouldn't say he wasn't on point about some of the things he said.

I've read twice today about Americans and conservatives having all or nothing black and white thinking but this post started in EADD seems to display a high level of this type of thought process.

I don't know? I could be wrong and honestly haven't been following it much nor listened that much to Andrew Tate.

Threads kinda fallen off course from original intent anyways.
 
Last edited:
somnilicious said:
Banning books and controlling the content that elementary school students have access to in public school libraries are not the same thing anyways but that doesn't stop the nuts from conflating it with Nazis burning books.
Click to expand...

The left doxxes anyone who publicly disagrees with them, destroys their personal and professional life, has any content created by them depublished and deplatformed, and attempts to erase them from history. The left controls content like no one else. I live in Canada, we are living under a hard left regime right now. People who openly protest the leftist government can have their bank accounts frozen.

The far right and the far left are a BIG PROBLEM right now.
 
someguyontheinternet said:
Yea they're taught in 100 and 200 level classes so students know the history, not as correct or useful theories

Are you aware that psychology is a science?
Click to expand...

So do you disagree with my discussion on archetypes? Or are you going to keep lecturing me about what is and isn't pseudoscience? Because I frankly don't care about this line of thinking.
 
Yea you've demonstrated you don't care if your ideas have been debunked 30 years ago, I think we know that already

Hey how about this now I say that I think phrenology is real and valid and you get to debunk it while I argue that it's real using blog posts from my schizophrenic grandmother as evidence
 
all of thaaaat shit is just monetizing hexagonal, octagonal many-nagonal BS, Tate><Tucker Carlson>Brand>Peterson>Harris>Hubermann whatever it is or should be like fun or even ignoring just for a week to put those wievs down cause it is the same repetitive shit they rely on you to
Oooo I'm disciplined Islamic man but I cannot shut up and need to yell,,,,shut the fuck up you are smart ok, go outside and play hide and seek or tell a joke
 
Burnt Offerings said:
I agree with some of the things you said here…nevertheless, I feel like you may be downplaying the altered environmental context that humans now live in.

For hundreds of thousands of years, or 95%+ of the total time on the planet, human beings lived in one specific environmental context, that of small hunter-gatherer bands. That’s our evolutionary heritage. Then they started tilling the fields, working in factories etc. So how is a man supposed to realize his primordial identity as a hunter when he lives in Brooklyn? For a long time men transferred this into being a provider within the capitalist economy, being a “breadwinner” etc, but there are no guarantees that this identity will be available into the future, at least not on the same level that it was in the past. You say that there are these archetypes that define masculine roles, but we don’t live in the Paleolithic or even the Bronze Age anymore, so I think that the question of how these roles can be realized in the present day, and within the specific environmental context we live in, is more of an interesting one than its perhaps given credit for
Click to expand...
Theyre realized through being the most violent and ruthless in poverty communities aka the hood. Get the most cash whoop the most ass, and youll be at the top slaying all the hoes (garden variety)

Until you go to prison and your kids grow up fatherless, or if you luck out get yourself shot by the cops and your family sues and wins 10 million….

Its sad and its thr inevitable outcome when positive heirarchys for men cease to exist
 
ChemicallyEnhanced said:
IMO there is nothing that a "man should be". Just be yourself.
There is no thing or things that "make a man" because that would mean that 4 billion people collectively share at least one attribute. Hell, it's 2023 so not even all men have a penis.

Good point about statistics. The ones around men's mental health are shocking. Like women are twice as likely as men to attempt suicide but men are four times more likely than women to actually kill themselves.
Click to expand...
This. I struggled massively with my identity from about 16 to 30yrs old until, having gone through rehab and openly questioning my sexuality, I realised it was me that could define my idea of being a ‘man’ and not the other way around.

I’m pretty typically feminine in my outlook and approach to the world - not very competitive, agreeable, gentle, artistic and aesthetic - and I’m now very comfortable with this. I also had a pretty crappy male role model growing up that came to give me far more reasons to dislike men than like them. I still struggle with male relationships but largely because i just don’t like the most men that I come across. Too competitive, not tactile enough, less likely to be emotionally open and vulnerable in the ways I need to be to feel secure in the world. Thankfully I now live somewhere where there are more guys who tend to exhibit these traits than in previous places I’ve lived but I still gravitate towards female relationships.
 
I would say "like me", except who wants someone who's been sectioned 4 times?
Testosterone is fucking toxic shit

Never owt dodgy, just batshit crazy! 🤣
 
Foreigner said:
In any psychology program, Jung and Freud are still taught. They are just properly positioned in their eras. Jung wasn't a scientist, he was a psychologist, so your statement is meaningles
Click to expand...
Precisely.

someguyontheinternet said:
Yea they're taught in 100 and 200 level classes so students know the history, not as correct or useful theories

Are you aware that psychology is a science?
Click to expand...
Psychology is a hybrid of science and philosophy. Holding it to the same rigors as hard sciences like chemistry, biology, and physics leads to poor comparisons and poorer arguments.

Diagnostics and assessment are much more heavily weighted by subjectivity than most sciences, making it unhelpful to hold figures like Freud and Jung up against scientific theorists of the same era. They were exploring incredibly ephemeral, nuanced, and abstract concepts, trying to find ways to pull data from patterns versus rigorous experimentation. Behaviorists like B.F. Skinner and John Watson nudged the field towards empiricism and away from the more esoteric elements of psychoanalysis, but that doesn't make behaviorism any more 'right' than anything else. Freud and Jung were pioneering minds who were able to bring about revolutionary change in the way we understand cosciousness and cognition. There were not many before them that approached the conceptualization of psychopathology, human experience, and the like, and they also had to bridge the gap between science and spirituality because you can't understand human experience without exploring both.

If you want someone who will really knock your socks off, check out Julian Jaynes and The Origin of Consciousness in the Bicameral Mind.

You are passionately incorrect, @someguyontheinternet - username checks out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top