Moving on from
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 лют 2018
- How can we move on as men and women in the wake of the #metoo campaign. Psychotherapist and relationship expert Louise Mazanti PhD talks to Rebel Wisdom founder and journalist David Fuller.
For more details on Louise Mazanti: www.mazantilousada.com/
They also discuss the viral interview between Jordan Peterson and Cathy Newman on Channel 4 News - see it here: • Jordan Peterson debate...
For more great content, go to: rebelwisdom.co.uk/
And please help us make more great content by supporting us on Patreon: / rebelwisdom
This is very good. I've been wondering about this notion of women using the narrative of being a victim as a weapon, and as an excuse for poor behaviour, for a while now. Interesting to see a professional Psychotherapist address this.
And look at the removal of 'grid girls' from F1, due to 'objectification'. But really it is the less pretty girls removing the pretty girls and making it a more even playing field.
I've found my babies climbing stairs, climbing up rungs on a ladder and walking accross our piano keys. It doesn't take long before they can climb. As a mother, I grabbed my child and carried them safely to the floor. My husband, instead, taught them (rather I should also say, gave them permission) to get themselves safely back to the ground. A man's influence is invaluable in raising children.
Virginia Nelson That is a great anecdote that highlights the differences in thought.
Virginia Nelson wonderful.
Mom: get down youll break your arm.
Dad: at least your legs are ok, your arm will heal.
You don't get it. He never put them in danger, he took the time to teach them to climb back down safely. He helped them become self-sufficient, while I moved in and took over.
I (female) did what your husband did. My husband (male) did what you did. It didn't have anything to do with gender or biological sex; it had to do with personality differences.
Yes! :-D
Yes, there is a problem with masculine expression these days, but it's not about toxic masculinity, patriarchy or male entitlement. Feminists are dead wrong about the nature of male problems. Boys have a special need for guidance and male role models in order to channel their male energy, and we have a society that lacks the sense of community, stable two parent families and economic stability required for men to mature. Men don't need to express their feelings the way women do, and this is what irks me about this interview. Men don't need to be so deep and touchy feely to get in contact with their male feelings. That's not the answer.
Women also have a problem taking responsibility for their agency in the world. Playing the victim is a very powerful tool for gaining influence for sure. Blaming men, has been the go to feminist response to all this. When I cringe at women comedians, it's not because I feel threatened by strong women. It's because I can sense resentful condescension a mile away. There really is this rage running through the collective unconscious, and it goes unacknowledged.
You're pretty much agreeing with everything that was said in the interview, but you're talking as though you're disagreeing? What you're saying about the different ways men and women need to express themselves is pretty much exactly what she said.
prschuster agree, but I wouldn't lump all men into one group. Some may be able to express their feelings better than others, and many certainly feel the need to. Rather than focusing on gender, I think the balance of anima and animus of the individual determines their prefered mode of expression.
Expresive! Mn indeed don't need to speak in the language of women. Why we women love the silent type. Men do women talk.
prschuster thank you for sharing your insight.
the sentence "When I cringe at women comedians, it's not because I feel threatened by strong women. It's because I can sense resentful condescension a mile away. There really is this rage running through the collective unconscious, and it goes unacknowledged." summarises our culture today.
It's the reason I quit mainstream media and turned to alternatives including Rebel Wisdom
@Kyle Rook I'm fully aware of the differences in expression of masculinity vs femininity, but I think you're fundamentally missing the point, as was prschuster. I don't believe most men are present in their relationships, any more than most women are. I would suggest reading "Way of the Superior Man" by David Deida. That book contains the explanation of & solution to the majority of modern relationship failures. It will explain to you how it is that men are failing to show up in the way their women want them to, and _[spoiler alert]_ it has nothing to do with the feminist garbage about men behaving like women. It's about being masculine in a way that today's generations of men have virtually never been exposed to, let alone learned to embody.
Thank you David and Louise - intensely thought-provoking. Simon (Life Coach, member of a Men's Group, father of two daughters)
Being able to give a name to women's collective rage is quite useful, and I share Dr. Mazanti's sentiment that the way we are handling it now does not reflect a future toward which we want to strive. Quashing all of masculinity and seeing everything through a lens of a victim-victimizer dichotomy is more destructive than we can collectively imagine.
Amazing observations and solutions, by transcending and taking our own responsibility... Thank you Louise
What’s missing in this conversation is the cultural context of the western society. When we live in a masculin competetive hierachical culture - both men and women are drawn to the masculine way (yang energy) to become ’successful’ in the capitalist economic hierarchy. The solution lies within the train of thought of balancing our culture towards female values (yin energy) like compassion, intuision, empathy, care, creativity a.s.o. That is the only way to restore the femenin / masculin balance.
I think that might be right . And that is missing from EVERY conversation.
And to solve this one must first solve the problem with masculine vs feminine internally, within, oneself :however pyshobabbleish or new age that may sound _ it is true. When we do that our culture will reflect it, by becoming healthy and balanced. Until we do it, we will be making claims whose inadequacy is never seen because they are at least partially true because the secondary mess- outside ourselves - does in fact reflect those claims .
"- balancing towards female values" - exactly ,- and within all, both men and women. - And allowing this, one can acknowledge that the worst offenders against this process can be women and feminists....something apparently inconceivable when we view the matter too literally - as almost everybody does currently.
And doing this , we might have a chance of regaining our INNOCENCE., something almost all of us have lost in this culture.
Exactly! It's a macro/micro relation in between Yin-Yang and the balance is within each and every one as well as the society as a whole. I do think people like Jordan Peterson are afraid of the masculine energy loosing it's grip over female energy and tries their best to demonize the natural shift that takes place right now. Too much Yang energy creates domination hierarchies and maybe we needed the alpha Yang masculine energy to lead us through the dark times but we''re now in a shift towards a time of harmony and less suffering. The more we try to hold on to the old masculine paradigm, the more pain we will experience.
And you're also right about the feminist moral mob that tries to dominate men with moralism that's not rooted in biological truths about human behavior. They always seems to gravitate toward the man to be the obliged abuser and women the innocent victim. This is where Jordan Peterson is right BUT he's afraid of the Yin energy that he refers to as 'chaos'. When Yin and Yang start acknowledging the importance of having a balance - humanity will evolve away from suffering.
A balance and a dance : a dance not a competition or a war!
Such a great interview! It has honestly made me look at Cathy Newman with more kind eyes :)
This was a fantastic interview, thank you both but especially Louise. I would love to hear more about the female rage you are describing and how both sides could deal with themselves in their separate spheres, but ultimately how to build bridges and reclaim good role models. Have you considered posting some of your work with women online a la Dr. Peterson? In this day and age it really seems to be the most effective way of conducting civilization-wide group therapy ;) All the best.
I agreed with a lot of what she said, but still came away feeling something about what she said was off.
Then I realized that it was this weird thing women often do, where men need to take responsibility, and yes, women need to take responsibility, but somehow, men need to help women do that as well.
I wanna find a real woman really owning that female shit in public, but alas, the search goes on.
@Kyle Rook HA!
I left that comment a year ago, and recently had a convo with a female friend who has repeatedly said "you don't now what it's like to be a woman."
The last time she said it, I said "I do know what it's like to be a woman. Because, I'm a man. And because I'm a man, women have been telling me what it's like to be a woman, for MY WHOLE LIFE."
It was kid of a funny moment, but she got the point (she's really a pretty cool person) and admitted I was right. That happened recently.
And today, you leave a comment, kinda about exactly all this, and also, making me reread my comment from a year ago.
Lol.
I think this male/female shit is eternal.
Beautiful insights Louise - love what you have to say, and please share more! Love your point about deconstruction and reconstruction. Early postmodernity = DE-constructive postmodernity. Mature postmodernity = RE-constructive postmodernity. Thank you for your contributions to creating a more mature postmodernity.
Wow....Bravo! So right with you Louise!! I see your work as an extension of the work of bell hooks..."The Will to Change..Men, Masculinity and Love." Here's a word that I have coined in an attempt to capture the thrust of your approach: Femanity (either Fem-an-ity, or Fe-man- ity) the powerful combination of Visionary Women, women tapping the wisdom of their bodies and Mature Men, who access an emotive way of knowing how men have been cut off by Patriarchal dominating ways of being to create a new more healthy humanity! The Deep Feminine...Amazing!! Please find the work of the ManKind Project, 70,000 men working on being awake to ourselves and to the and the Deep Feminine you so elegantly speak of. I love your description of meeting our pain with the body. This so feels like how I work with couples in Emotionally Focused Couples Therapy. Using our emotionally embedded wisdom to break negative cycles of fighting based in logical repetitions of the left brain. Such a breath of fresh air. I wish you well and hope to share more in the future. Blessings, Joseph
This interview gives me hope for the future. I have hope that we will see calmer days after this collective purge. Calm comes after the storm.
Thanks so much Louise for your brilliant insight into the femenine. As a guy Im having trouble dealing with hardcore feminists, or even feminists in general and I really needed to learn what you have to say.
I would love to hear more from you about the feminine as it´s very much needed for me, and men like me. Which i think is alot of people.
LuckieLuuke sorry bro no offense to you dude but this woman is just a bullshit artist. Its just a bunch of chick splaining. Effe that. " Bla bla bla give me more stuff....."
PURE CRAP
Definitely I've found there are certain aspects of life women are totally in tune with that men aren't. I can't quite put my finger on it but there have been many times when a woman will state something matter-of-factly that took me a long time and a lot of thought to figure out, as if it's just apparent, the way that the sky is blue.
TELL HER TO TALK TO JORDAN...
I think that would be a great conversation.
i love this
I agree with a lot of what she is saying and appreciate that she as a woman is acknowledging the shadow side of feminism and the feminine. And yet somehow at the same time I feel like as a man I am still being talked down to. I think its because she kept somehow coming back to what men also need to do. Men need to show up more, Jordan Peterson should have said I hear your anger but I want to move past it. Right now I am unwilling to be told what I need to do by a woman. There is too much hostility coming from women right now to be able to receive that. And we have some great examples of powerful men like Jordan Peterson who are standing up for truth and calling on other men to do the same, so we don't really need women to do that. I think right now we need men to regroup amongst themselves as I think in many ways we are. And I think women need to regroup amongst themselves and sort their shit out. And then we might be able to come back together and have these kinds of conversations. But sadly I cannot think of a single well known female public figure that is doing what Jordan Peterson for women. Christina Hoff Sommers may be the closest or maybe some of the older feminists are speaking up but they seem to be vilified and drowned out immediately by the feminist borg.
She is asking BOTH men and women to do better.
Camille Paglia is another one
It takes a lot of courage say all of this. Respect to this woman.
I love Mazanti's clarity and courage in speaking truth. I would love it if she might be able to address this question, about which I feel a bit unsettled after watching this video. What would she say about women (or anyone) who were abused in childhood? As she undoubtedly knows, such “victims”, and there are millions of them, may have compromised emotional development and boundaries and will have difficulty in NOT being taken advantage of as victims in adulthood, at least until they have done a lot of challenging healing work. And getting such help is expensive and not even available to everyone. I know because I am a psychotherapist who works with such people. I wonder, is her viewpoint about "stop being victims" a bit unsympathetic to such people, who truly were innocent victims as children? Does it assume a level of healing and agency which really cannot be assumed at all?
Important material expressed here! Excellent
I hope Cathy sees Louise & Profesor Jordan Peterson as a patient 😇ll be Bliss for her.🙏🏽
Another great video from you and why I've subscribed. Louise is fantastic and required in today's society. Thank you for this!
Scott Roy pure poison.
Next time a woman is coming at you in any kind of argument... be it small or large... sincerely say "I feel your rage... I understand you..." - and see what happens.
This is a lovely concept, but it doesn't work. I have been married to that in the distant past. Tried endlessly myself, she took us to counseling, which I readily agreed to - when the counselor started down the same road... that was our last visit.
It is very easy to have the answers from a distant couch and a stable mind. However, half of a nation raised by single mothers, that raised all those men that 'aren't present' - that never had a father to teach them how... and now we have women that won't listen to reason for half a second no matter what kind of acknowledgement is given - I'm sorry, but the cycle was self-generated when Men's rights were whittled away out of the family. I don't see it correcting for quite a while. It's going to take a generation of latch-key kids exposed to the likes of Petersons, Weinsteins, Harrisons, etc. to completely engage their own lives, and be able to insulate themselves from the madness.
you definetely make an important point, cheers
Yes because it's 100% the woman's fault at all times if she is a single mother. Not a single man is at fault ever for not being a good father.
We are all family
Yes, Jordan was mainly in his mind (well, it's a TV interview, not a date), but I think he showed a whole lot of compassion and feeling. The main problem as I see it was that Jordan was speaking from a psychological space and Cathy from a political space. They can seldom (if ever..) meet.
Loved this. Thanks for sharing!
25:13 translation: blame Jorden
26:00 I don't know if that had been in any way productive since I've seen men pointing out this. And in both frustrated ways as very toned down... but every time the woman had reacted negatively because it is quite arrogant and often is percieved as patronizing. In all honesty: WHO wouldn't be irritated if someone, when talking about ideas, started to in some way blame the feelings of their counterpart?
And what man doesn't avoid being patronizing to a woman!?
Well if she reads the comments, she'll see that the masculine also has a lot of rage that must be acknowledged! Perhaps the healing and rebuilding can finally start.
Brilliant, we need so much more discussion and analysis at this level.
Maybe so, I suspect there is some truth in your insight. Yet Peterson endorsed Fuller in the interview he gave to Rebel Wisdom and the above interview and it does resonate with some of the analysis JP himself made elsewhere. I mean we are all celebrating the six million views figure, but there has to be more than dissecting the shallow invective of the radical feminism.
Ian Burns, 100% agree. Would love to see a conversation between her and Peterson.
This Black Knight Fool guy seems to have misunderstood her perspective pretty badly in my opinion, based on his other comments i've seen. Apparently he spent all last night copy/pasting this same comment into every thread on this video...
What I understood out the commentary at the very end of this video is that Jordan Peterson (ideally and hipothetically speaking) should have put his hand in Newmans hip at some point, and then misteriously stare and smile at her whilst keep on listening. Granted, a tv set was not the suitable scenario for this, but yout get the idea. Any opinions on this take?
yes, lol...
Rather unrealistic to expect Peterson to have been able to somehow transition Ms. Newman from her full bore attack into a productive open psychoanalytic exchange. Aside from that a very interesting discussion.
How can we move on? On separate paths. Women will apparently have no rage when men avoid them, and men will be able to be among other men who don't hate them. Problem solved.
I think that this is a good conversation, but here are two points that need to be acknowledged:
1. In hominid evolution and in our closest living ancestors (chimps) the male's role is to go kill animals to feed the family and secondly, to kill any chimps that have the nerve to cross into the territory looking for food and/or mates. So males are not put together psychologically primarily for nurturing the young and building cohesive social structures as are females. (Yes, there are lots of exceptions and variation around the means). To demand that we have the same empathetic level as women (in general) misunderstands the biological aspects of gender.
2. Bemoaning the lack of power, feminists do not mention the tremendous power of sex in gender relationships. I know of very few men that do not understand that if they do not please their partners they ain't getting what they most want that day, week, month. Women have ways in the family unit of exerting plenty of power. That does not spill over so much into the workplace, but still men tend to try to please women, especially those of high fitness and reproductive.
Victimhood keeps you down
It's true, there is no power in victimhood, only dependence, weekness, not taking responsability, complaints and drinking this sweet, sweet poison of blaming others, gliding deeper and deeper into victimhood of your own thinking, a tragic joice.
The problem with masculinity is the demonizing of it. I moved out of a women work environment (20 year in it) to a men's one. What a relief, the mates relationships that came through, getting on with work as a group. Having fun together. Free range again.
Really brilliant.
Black Knight Fool What didn't you like in what she said?
It is very interesting what she says about Scandinavian society concerning the sex egalitarianism and how under this apparently wonderful and ideal model lies a confused man about his own masculinity...therefore, I must
at least think that something goes no that well with this egalitarianism
WILL YOU STOP TELLING MEN TO STEP UP
5:10 so if a guy gropes me he's not wrong but I'm wrong for not acting a certain way and making myself a victim, quite mysogynistic.
It's such a great thing that youtube is becoming a resource where Jungian ideas can be discussed and disseminated.
Thinking Architipally has had many positive effects in my own life.
Keep em coming - for the good of all.
That's not thinking archetypically, thats using Jungian terms distortedly. I highly recommend you to read Neumann's The Origin of Consciousness. What you see here are completely lost people who take any straw they find because they are not able to mange to really connect with themselves.
No I didn't see it, but from skimming through I believe he means masculinity in the sense "I will rescue you out of your borderline hell, so I can partake in your mysterious feminine knowing". Its just codependency in my book, and if they are happy playing this game I won't stand against it. I just think its stupid and anti-individualistic. Despite yes, the quotes you put do look crypto feministic, spiced with a "understanding, new agey" note that feels slightly more emancipated but still is so awefully needy.
Referring to the first article: I don't know why they need to conflate all these different interests with sexuality and make such a big thing out of it. Wait, I do actually, they are not strong enough to just follow their own interest without having it sanctioned by some kind of movement. It's pathetic.
"Think" is a bit euphemistic, it's more acting out desperate and masochistic programs to get some female approval.
24:50 to 25:24 Why is it Dr. Peterson's responsibility to understood why Kathy Newman is so angry?
Sigh....why should men have to learn and think like women? We were fine until woman started demanding this telling us to be more like them
Louise Manzati PhD: I really feel that there is this collective, subconscious rage that is just boiling in women, and it's coming up in so many ways. We see [it] in the media and [with] what's going on. It’s this unowned rage that comes up in many different ways. On one hand, it needs to come out. We need to clear it, it needs to be expressed, it needs to be acknowledged. On the other hand, it's not enough. This is only, like… breaking the ice so that the next step of evolution can, you know, [this] consciousness can start coming through, and that's what [is] lacking in women.
It's really to take responsibility for what we do as women. In manipulation, in our seduction, in our control, it's so easy for women to say, “but that's just because we're angry” and “men did this” and “patriarchy”, but it's such a lack of responsibility, and these women really need to know.
David Fuller: Because we could say, we could look at, say, #MeToo which has been kind of ongoing for a long time and [is] still a massive force, and we can say that it's brought up a lot of male shadows. It's showing up a lot of male behavior that is just inexcusable, should not happen, and it certainly, you could say, started as a positive thing, but then you also have…perhaps a danger of it's slipping into a very simplistic narrative of men as only aggressors, women as only victims. Is that something that you're worried about?
Louise Manzati PhD: I'm very worried about that because… it has displayed the male shadow, but who talks about the female shadow? The rage that women are expressing blindly and projecting onto whichever situation and whichever men that they can. This is where women need to step up and take responsibility and stop blaming men. It's pointless. We need to transcend this. We can't solve this problem from the same level, we need to transcend and look at “How am I adding to this dynamic as a woman?” because we are. We are co-creating it in perfect harmony. If women are angry, we absolutely need to take responsibility for getting ourselves to another place.
David Fuller: I mean, that's the kind of shadow [at] work. [It’s] the acceptance that we all have shadows, that men certainly have a shadow. There is a shadow around masculinity, but there's also a shadow around femininity, and, while part of the cultural conversation now is “toxic masculinity” and, everyone knows what you mean by “toxic masculinity”, if you talk about “toxic femininity” everyone still knows what you mean, but you can't have that conversation…It’s interesting what is allowed to be said and what is not allowed to be said at the moment and that, I think, is very dangerous - that certain topics, certain conversations are off-limits.
Louise Manzati PhD: This is where we see the victim/persecutor dynamics activate because women become the victims, and we make ourselves the victims, and we persecute men, but in that aggression, in that reach, when we are the victims: we are in perfect control. We become the persecutors because we say “It's all about blame. Men did this and men need to take responsibility” but in that we become the persecutors.
Brian Fuller: It's also a problem with the media because the short attention span of the media wants to polarize things, and it's…therefore very easy, like, it's a very straightforward narrative: victim perpetrated. And yet, the true dynamics needs something more than just a very short analysis or a soundbite. It needs to be unpacked over time, and…it's easily taken out of context which is why it's such a hot potato for the media to handle.
Louise Manzati PhD: It’s also a very, very old story about [how] you cannot say to a woman in a public debate, “Take responsibility for what you’re doing, take responsibility for the role that you’re playing into”. I want to talk for a moment about the Presidents Club. I don’t know very much about the details, but I think that women in this country, when we enter a room, we have an absolute right to put up a boundary. We have an ability to put up a boundary and say, “ I’m not going to play this game. I’m not going to co-create this antagonism between men and women. I’m not going to co-create this patriarchal structure and be a victim.” If I’m working in a bar somewhere and someone is groping me, I have the responsibility and the right to say. “Stop.”, and the right to go to my manager and have that person kicked out, or walk out of the room. No one needs to be a victim, and this is what women just simply don’t want to hear. They don’t want to take responsibility for what we are co-creating. We like being the victims. We like blaming men instead of doing our own work and say, “What am I getting from this whole seduction/control manipulation? I get power. The power of the victim.” It’s the easy power, it’s a cheap power, and it’s not long lasting. We really need to have this conversation in a balanced way.
Not all male managers are that nice. Was at the Hay Festival and overheard a conversation between Alan Yentob and an American guy who was unknown to me, but who obviously knew Weinstein and was defending his actions. Alan Yentob, to his credit , was not defending him. Unfortunately, frequently guys stick together, when a woman puts her head above the parapets to complain, she will often find herself edged out of her job and with a sticky reference situation to boot.
This is Ken Wilber in spades.
What exactly is "Men's Work"?
Ciaran Cosgrave well, when was the last time you saw a woman use a shovel?
LOL! Not sure I ever have. As a committed male feminist, that's one thing that really bothers me. The way that the patriarchy deliberately keeps women out of all the dangerous,back breaking and dirty jobs! It's just not fair! ;-)
When I was clearing the snow off the driveway a couple of weeks ago. If you lived anywhere near me you would also see the ladies putting shovels to good use in stables and also occasionally making mortar
I think it's things like mowing the lawn, building a shelf, fixing the car...etc As opposed to women's work like cooking, cleaning, cooking...etc
LOL!
Initiation seems to be the thing that's needed to make men face their boy psychology and grow into maturity
I have been working with men and initiation in the online new paradigm program
www.inner-throne.com
Feel free to visit the webpage and be inspired. Most men want to "grow up" but it seems like they are not willing to pay the price they are not willing to pay the prize, which IMHO is their Peter Pan boy psychology switching between the need for comfort and release/addiction and the attachment to powerplay, materialism, and fear of change.
@ 21:05 David does a good job of summarising the Jungian approach that underlies much of Peterson's work, but judging by her response it's clear it sails right over Ms. Mazanti's head.
@ 24:05 "women know on a deeper level than men"
Really? Alright then, I don't know everything and I'm quite happy to learn. So explain that claim to me.
"Really? Alright then, I don't know everything and I'm quite happy to learn. So explain that claim to me."
This is exactly what she was talking about. You're trying to intellectualize something that can't be intellectualized. And she seems to be expressing Jungian ideas of femininity quite well from what i saw...
Does she ever explain where this incredible "feminine rage" originates from?
I asked someone who hashtagged "Me Too" to, if they were comfortable, talk about what happened in as much detail as they cared to provide. They immediately went HOW DARE YOU at me and all of their other Facebook pals circled the wagon in frenzied virtue signaling. This bewildered me because as someone who had something intensely terrifying and confusing encounter happen to me as a teenager (an older male friend tried to kiss me and I freaked out about it when he got too pushy for my comfort level, and to this day I have no idea what the hell he was on about or whether or not I was simply an idiot who overreacted) but didn't want to copypasta a context-less two word phrase, I wanted to be part of the dialogue that was supposed to be taking place about sexual harassment.
I think that it is fair enough to invite someone to discuss their experiences as they wish and think the response you got sounds unfair. However, not everyone wishes to discuss experiences, even anonymously. It must also be remembered that where wrongdoing is done in the course of employment, it is frequently covered up by non-disclosure agreements, the victim often just wants a half decent reference so that they are able to move on by getting a new job elsewhere, this is often the only way that they can get anything other than a bare bones reference.
Entitlement on your part
@@439bananas Which all could have been communicated without immediately going to "how dare you", I think.
@@giselemendoza1561 Well I mean if you're going to flip out at me and act like I did something horrendously unforgiveable I think at minimum it's a little bit impolite to do that without telling me *why*...
So it was my fault that I was sexually abused, raped and almost murdered on many occasions as a child?
I should 'take responsibility' for that?
21:39 Radical feminism: the ideological art of throwing the baby out with the bathwater and know that it is righteous.
Sorry but that is just wrong. Men have not failed in developing our personalities and we are not lacking at all in motive or drive to look into ourselves. Society simply tells us that all we think and feel is wrong and is to be deconstructed and unmasked as patriarchy (just like all the women had decided, that they had of course known all along). Men are heavily interested in personal development we are just not offered ANY avenue, school is for girls and society is for women. So there is really no forum for that kind of discourse.
Just look at Jordan Peterson, he has millions of men and interested in his lectures and personal videos because he talks deeply about masculinity, and he does it all the time. What has happened to him? He has been attacked multiple times by feminists and post-modernists because he dared to, in a university none the less, talk about men as men and not something that is to be reconstructed and wrong. He dares to be positive and encouraging towards men and that's wrong according to feminists.
Again school is for girls and society is for women and any attempt to correct this on a philosophical or theological level and allow men to truly express themselves without being censored by femininity is embattled fervently. You blame us, I blame them and JP is all the proof you could ever need for that claim.
Pretty much exactly what I was thinking when I was listening to that part of this spoken word salad.
Bands of Mesch Couldn't agree with you more!! You hit the nail on the head. It's an important message that masculine, centered and purpose-driven men should focus on.
Agree strongly. Nailed it..Articulate and profound..Cheers!!!
It saddens me to see the state of men these days, it really does. My journey resulted in me embracing my masculinity a few years ago, and realising I didn't have to be ashamed of it. My life has totally changed, and now I badly want to help as many of my brothers as I can to see this for themselves.
What saddens me here is that this woman is actually spot on, but all the men commenting here are so out of touch with their masculinity, they can't even see it. Modern men have forgotten what it means to be men. Jordan Peterson is a perfect example of what being a man looks like, but not for the reasons you think.
Being a man means having conviction in your beliefs, and standing for them steadfastly no matter what happens. It means being unflinching in the face of resistance, staying committed to your truth and your mission no matter what. This is what is meant by "men test ideas, and women test men". The destructive feminism you complain about is this exact dynamic playing out on a cultural scale. In the pick-up artist community, this is known as a "shit test". Women act like bitches and do crazy things to piss you off, to see if you'll let them know you won't tolerate any crap, or just them get away with it. Feminism has been doing this for almost half a century, and during that time men have gotten weaker and weaker. For this to end, there needs to come a point where men collectively say enough is enough, and make it clear that this bullshit won't be tolerated.
It's not like it's mens' fault - generations of men have been raised without fathers or strpong male role models, and the feminist influence in our culture has conditioned boys to be ashamed of their masculinity, to act more like girls. We have generations of feminised men, who would have been ridiculed by men of our great-grandfather's generation.
I see men here complaining that they're not responsible for what's happening, it's the society that shits on men, and feminism/women are to blame. Tell me - how is this not playing the victim card? How is this any better than the feminist women you despise, who disclaim and responsibility and just blame the other sex? To quote OP's own words:
"Again school is for girls and society is for women and any attempt to correct this on a philosophical or theological level and allow men to truly express themselves without being censored by femininity is embattled fervently."
Without knowing, you've proven this doctor's point. You're throwing your hands up in the air because there's resistance to what you believe to be right. Men who have fully developed their personalities would not be complaining about this. They'd be busy putting a stop to it, because they wouldn't let the prospect of resistance stop them from taking action they knew must be taken.
You can complain all you like about how unfair the world is, and how you can't be held responsible for it. Nobody's stopping you. But you know who does that? Boys. Just like this doctor said, most "men" today are still boys. They haven't grown up and taken ownership of the world they live in. So go ahead and complain all you want - but just know that you're only proving her right.
Lachlan Bell I'm not saying anything that is proving her right at all. I fully agree with EVERYTHING you say beyond this. I am simply pointing out the reason men are in such a poor state and unwilling to grow up, she can not see this. I don't think I or anyone else should just give up. But just as you say "enough is enough", we have to tell them that they are doing damage to us and our civilization as a whole.
As female, I applaud discussion on 'toxic femininity' where people are using their form, gender/sex as an excuse not to take responsibility for their choices and perpetuate seeking self-justification for reasons of ego-vanity. Not taking responsibility 'fragments' ones energy. Taking responsibility needs also to be supported by intention holistically/ transcendentally of non-ill will and non-harm that includes oneself. Much evasion and falsely projecting blame is connected to fear of inadequacy, fear that otherwise one would be 'obliged' to hate oneself, fear of others’ perceived judgement against oneself and of internalising this. (In the cause of ‘intersectionality’ (ha ha ha:-), I would suggest that classical Islam, with its religiously supremacist, genocidal and apartheid doctrines and laws and associated Munchausen syndrome of victimhood (and its non-Muslim chorus of supportive ‘cattle voting for Eid’), could come in for similar discussion. Only joking...or maybe not;-)
As a person who does not obsess with what is between her legs.
Kinda accidental...video A led to B, etc. Thought I'd give a thumbs up on the discussion aspect while I was here, as Louise sounded a bit depressed about negative reactions. If you do not detain me, I will creep off;-) but remember, this is UA-cam!
I see you have deleted your previous comment. Porquoi, mon brave?
I refer to the comment that explained your meaning of "feminist confederate". When I read your designating me thus, at first I thought you perceived me as an enemy who was “confederate” with people against you; why you would think that beats me (unless, like in classical Islam, others who do not submit are ipso facto an ‘enemy’ to you:-) Then I thought, “Oh, maybe ‘confederate’ means he sees me as an ally. That’s nice”, so I returned to remove that quizzical portion. Then I read your explanatory comment and thought, “It was an attack after all!” And you seemed as if one of those geezers who cannot bear to pass up an opportunity to bash women, while strangely lauding “heterosexual relationships”… One writes things in one ‘tone’, but it may be read in another...Dang shame, the price of the written word; but do you think we ironed it out?
My concern was not so much for Louise as for the discussion on ’toxic femininity’ (e.g, the display Cathy Newman put on with Jordan B Peterson) that she thought would be useful, and which I also think would be useful. I have written with humour…Even the part where I said (and I paraphrase) you seem quite capable of ruining relationships without anyone's help. (I was considering removing that comment, as you removed your previous comment, but I see you have edited again to write "I had given you the benefit of the doubt but I can see the hostility oozing out of your words. Your awkward over concern for some random woman acting depressed was a red flag that I overlooked because I thought your age made it likely you were perhaps not as aware of what was going on here. I was waay off!” Your cover is blown, Petal:-) However, I may yet remove it if you are good;-)
Let me start again… You challenged my first comment by asking “As a female or female feminist?” “Female” is a word on which there is largely consensual understanding. “Feminist”, not so much: it sort of ranges from opposition to prejudicially downtreading females to females wanting to lord it over males. However, whatever it stands for, it appears to refer to something you despise. In your next comment you called me a “feminist confederate” and accused me of “always lurking around these kind of comment sections. Its creepy” What kind of comment sections? I do not often comment on this sort of stuff but found my way here from ua-cam.com/video/ZyggRvJUOxQ/v-deo.html (“A Psychologist and a Former Channel 4 Producer Discuss Cathy Newman”). “It’s creepy”?…So friendly of you to say, BKF! In your original (now deleted) reply to my mystification over the term “feminist confederate”, you appeared to accuse me of deceitful and otherwise inimical intent and activity; thus my reply about “sex war” and harming relationships. Did I misunderstand that deleted comment?…Was your deleting it your giving me “the benefit of the doubt”? Your remark on “hostility oozing” from my words was perhaps added after you read my comment beginning “I refer to the comment that explained your meaning of ‘feminist confederate’…”, which I had intended as good-humoured though factual description of my thinking, not hostility or insult. When I wrote “And you seemed as if one of those geezers…” it was framed in the past tense with a London accent in mind. If you perceived this as insult and hostility, I regret that my language was unclear to you. Unless one has taken out recent patent on a word, it may always have unintended associations for others, especially in writing. I am glad you are not a misogynist. Have a nice afternoon in Canada. Meanwhile, in England it is dark and I want my supper.
PS I only watched about 13 minutes of the present video, having previously watched the next c. 11 minutes on ua-cam.com/video/ZyggRvJUOxQ/v-deo.html, mentioned above. My comment on that video was (next one paragraph)…
While I agree with Louise on Cathy Newman's prejudicial "agenda", "projection", "manipulation, control, abuse", "anger" and "power game”, in my experience the "rage" is only "in the collective" for people who heavily identify with their bodies and gender/sex, and not "boiling in every woman", though anyone may speak out on injustice wherever perceived (including injustice toward men). When a person, male or female of whatever sexuality, does not make an ego-identity of their form, gender/sex and define themselves to themselves through this conceptional lens, there is no conceptual "collective" on its basis (thus no "denial" of related "collective rage"). By seizing hold of form as a self, one is conceptually seizing on an inconstant, something which can be conditioned and altered whether one will or no, and which is divisible until only energy remains. One does not need to deny ones form or sexuality or what is here and now and experienced, but what gender is consciousness, awareness, insight, taking responsibility, the direct experience of the senses?
…I have now watched the last few minutes of the present interview. I am perhaps less convinced than Louise that Cathy Newman’s “rage” was not too heavily laced with vanity and attachment to enmity to be eased by someone telling her they understand it, given that she seemed so keen on distorting what Jordan B Peterson said.
Taking father's away from kids and denutting men taking away competition
I'm pleased she didn't completely shit on all men, but here's the thing - if she wants men to "show up", women have got to give them a reason TO show up. If men show up only to be shamed or belittled they're not going to do it. Humans are very incentive/reward centric, if the "reward" for playing the game, gives her more reasons to be mad at men, we're not going to play. Enjoy your cats, wine and microwave meals for one, and men will find refuge in video games, porn and denying women the fruits of his labour.
And of course, all Mazanti needs to do is ask a few men why they are gone. But pomo, which she values so much, won't allow her. Also, that rage women have seems induced by false information.
The Newman/Peterson interview accomplished precisely what Newman and her producers wanted. That is, lots of eyeballs locked on an intellectual slugfest, which ended with a winner and a loser.
When a fight is the point of the show, aggression, antagonism and bad feelings will result. It was Newman's job to come out swinging, so she did. If she can draw on some genuine "collective rage" to make it a better show for her viewers and maybe drum up a few more along the way, all the better.
Unfortunately, that show-biz context mitigates against the Newman/Peterson interview serving much use for in-depth analysis of the broader subject. Too much time spent on that.
Where does all this rage come from? Do women just hate men? Is this a recent phenomenon (i.e. less than 100 years)?
Hi Geoff, it's historical. The way our ancestors established domination was for invading tribes to slaugher all indigenous men, and women, and rape the little girls
being going on for about 6000 years. Before that the city states were partnerships or matriarchal. The church exacerbated the problem by inventing marriage, breaking up clans, and putting women under the control of one man who owned her
basically, it's epigenetic
"Women need men to show up"
Does she mean that men should be emotionally open and available? But you can't have it both ways - every man learns very early how women manipulate and hurt their emotions, so you can't expect men to be open AND have the privilage of manipulating them.
She actually said "men need to show up with a woman who is present" or words to that effect. I have no idea what this means. She strikes me as a bit of a bullshitter. Most of what she said was waffle.
It's New Age Jargon, very closely related to Art Speech and Post-Modernist Bullshit.
the solution to metoo and all other woman related problems is very simple... All men should go MGTOW Monk! Women want to rule the world? fine, let them try without us. if every man in every Western Country completely boycotted women, refused to perform any services for women, refused to even speak to women tben all this feminist bullshit would collapse within a month. We would strip women of their unearned rights and they'd be back on their knees sucking our cocks and scrubbing our floors just as God intended. in the meantime however, be free, be safe, be a MGTOW Monk!
In what way is it post modern?
She means, as I understand it (she elaborates towards the end of the video) that men need to acknowledge what is going on under the surface- the reality that's right in front of them which women (she suggests). Using the Jordan Peterson -- Cathy Newman exchange as an example- she suggests that he could have acknowledged the dynamic going on, so as to say something along the lines of "hey look, you're clearly angry, and you seem to be projecting this rage onto me, but i'm clearly not the person you think i am so lets talk about what's really going on here, because obviously we're talking past each other."
Obviously, she is not saying that JP was wrong and CN was right in that example, but that this would have been the way for JP to bridge the gap from his side. This seems like a reasonable proposition to me.
This is just my understanding of her views though, I can't speak for her with perfect accuracy. I'm not sure if you're really interested though since you seem to be talking about different people in your comment (I don't think she said anything about how women SHOULD manipulate men- she clearly admonishes women to stop manipulating men several times in the video).
"We need to pull everything apart and put it back together again"
The Frankfurt school have nothing to do with postmodernism. Marxism and post-modernism are also pretty much enemies. Just FYI.
@6:55 Re: men don't dig deep into themselves
Utter bollocks. Ms. Mazanti should try LISTENING TO MEN one day.
@ 8:05 re: where are the men
Maybe, just maybe Ms. Mazanti, the reason you say you can't see or hear men is that YOU'RE NOT LISTENING TO US.
Jesus, Mary and Joseph.
Men are emotional. Displaying it publicly on a mass scale and continual basis is a recipe for disaster. Again, what women say they want and how they respond to such things are two totally different things. Women simply are not attracted to this type of behavior in men except on paper.
pretty sure that's what she does for a living...lol
Well women can be a victim in a car crash as I walk past not wanting to get a sexual assault charge
Grow up show up = its men's fault. Effe that. No thanks.
There's no room for men against women or women in comparison to men anymore. We need to stop blaming and pointing fingers at each other and grow up and move on. Just strive be a strong person and stop searching for role models in today's society. Both genders work together, play together, serve together etc. so I believe we need to abandon outdated stereotypes and focus on individuality. It's done, it's over, divide and conquer worked like a charm but now it's a mess so be a kind human and start from there!
Hear, hear. Sense at last
Men was never against women, but women still are. Don't equalize wrongs
Marla Jacques boys want and need role models. Please do not vote.
Marla Jacques spoken as a dependent. Easy to cast it all away when the men folk pay for everything. Spoiled girl talk.
We are not lacking...woman have invaded our evolved domain we have not invaded theirs
Demographics is destiny: Louise's parents are from Catalonia and Denmark, with fertility rates of 1.33 and 1.7 respectively. You can talk all you want about male-female relationships, but until you solve the death spiral we're in in Europe, and especially in Spain, all this is ignoring the existential issue. When historians rake over the ashes of the West, they'll wonder how we spent so much time talking about sex, and so little time raising children. Start practicing your "Allahu Akhbars" cos you'll need it...
No, we can't read your minds....still, so if you can't articulate it we sure as hell can't understand it.
Ye have anger and so do we; ye have been given as much as possible to make life safe, comfortable and full of potential and ye still are whinging about being oppressed. Yes, there are assholes around and we all have to just put up with them, but the sheer ingratitude ye display is so demoralising that we are getting past caring anymore.
If ye don't like something go and change it and stop nagging us to do what we do differently. Set up your own political parties and businesses, give us the great women's renaissance that we have worked and innovated so hard and so long to give ye the freedom to achieve.
Well said sir!
Louise may be more of a detriment to this channel than a boone. She seems to lack full grasp of the subject matters and has an off putting, child like speech. Camille Paglia, as an alternative example, has a much greater command in the understanding of contemporary woman’s struggle and the men who have become ambivalent.
Unfortunately, this discussion involves too much psychobabble. It would’ve been much more productive if the participants had spoken in plain language. The listener can only assume that he or she knows what is being said because the jargon is so vague. Jordan is much more precise and clear with his language.
Men don't need to show up, that's disgustingly codependent. The men that have all the qualities these "raging women" so desperately want are more interested in partners of equal development. These women are so full of blind hatred because they don't help themselves and instead feel childish entitlement to being rescued by someone more worthy than they are. Yet the only men which are willing to spend any second with them are either just as full of shit as them, or have an unhealthy rescue complex and the snake continues to bite its own tail.
This whole thing is about conscious people who hone their character, fight this out within their own family and stay in tune with "truth" and nature; and unconscious people which are unwilling to be themselves and continue to yield to their lowest instincts, pushing their family complexes onto society at large and engage in futile rebellion against what must be. Like attracts like, and I am glad those guys are stuck together.
To show up for your partner is "codependent"? Sounds like you've had some good relationships!
Did everyone in the comments see a different interview or something? Why is there so much hate? I hear/see two people speaking respectfully and in depth to one another. I think ya'll are missing the message entirely. Brian and Louise had a LOT more agreements than disagreements. Focus on the broad message instead nit-picking the little details and acting as if this interview wasn't valuable as a conversation. There are real concerns on both side. This is a collective effort for progress. She says she feels like most men are boys, isn't that the same thing Jordan Peterson talks about? "There's nothing uglier than an old infant." - JP. I think she needs to understand that men need guidance and are being neglected culturally, and people like Peterson are really helping teach that sense of purpose. Meanwhile, she recognizes the faults of women and is calling women to take responsibility. Great message. Great Interview. So happy to see this dialogue happening!
Men and women act like boys and girls because women have had the power to unnaturally dominate the social landscape. There is no solution. Modern western society is like a dog with two amputated legs now. It will survive for a while but, never be able to run again.
yeah all right, I think the same
these guys are trolls. They're going to be angry no matter what.
irrational new-age jargon had me turning this off in a minute. try again.
yeah, i'm looking at who these people are, now.
There taking away rights
When someone calls themselves a psychotherapist and uses the term 'subconcious' it demonstrates they haven't understood or perhaps even read Freud, Adler or Jung.
I'm surprised you chose to interview this person.
What say as women, we should identify as male for the sake of our pay packets?
This is bull.......She so delicate, and thinks she can speak for women....she is in denial. Transparency, openness and honesty. She is promoting the silence, and does not represent me!
me neither. I was raped as a child, attacked at knifepoint as a teenager, and sustained several attacks as an adult. My whole life I've been unable to form relationships and have focussed on my healing. It's taken 55 years. I don't need this silly woman to tell me I need to take responsibility for people attacking me.
What rage? Rage about what? Rage that women don't have to wash clothes by beating them on a rock? What rage?
ManInTheBigHat the have rage because they are less than men. Not equel Period.
I have no idea what she's talking about. I don't know any women who want to be victims. Of COURSE women are angry. How could they NOT be? The question should be more, why aren't men angry? Women have been conditioned to swallow their feelings and go along with the harassment. That's why we havent spoke out until now. Not because we want to be victims.
Elicia Deva men are bullied by other men too, we have to learn to stand up for ourselves too. Women are bullies too, we all gotta learn to stand up for ourselves.
Of course, we are all bullied. What many men are refusing to understand is the dynamics of patriarchy and how that has carried into the present, with the way that women were forced to endure sexual harassment because it was expected and because our livelihoods depended on ti. This is much different than the dynamics of individual bullying.
Elicia Deva
I'd say it's less that they want to be victims and more that they don't want to be responsible and accept the consequences, so instead they deflect the blame.
Makes me think of when I was little and me and my siblings would sneak watching the tv. And then when my parents would come down angry someone would scream "so and so turned it on!" Or "it wasn't me!". Despite their tattling, everyone including themselves would get in trouble because everyone wasn't following the rules, which is the right response. Difference is, in the outside world we don't like to demonize women, which is how feminism can scream "my body my choice" meanwhile child support is still a thing. Nobody has the gall to go against that. Metoo getting out of hand is a symptom of not placing enough responsibility on women
"Want" to be victims, is different than acting as victims.
Your statement "Of COURSE women are angry. How could they NOT be?" is, on its own, a victim statement, as is "Women have been conditioned". All are statements from victim hood.
I feel as what the speaker is referring to is that, yes, it's been beneficial for women to speak out up until now. That speaking out is creating a new future for us; men and women alike. Perhaps what she's saying is that we're now at the opportune time to surpass this, and to meet it all with a new frame, one that helps us all to grow rather than any particular gender.
The problem grows with the "speaking out" mentality. For, if everyone is "speaking out", then we're no longer having conversations. To "speak out" is a one directional message, and one that's identifying the speaker as the victim (unfortunately).
Without a doubt, the #MeToo movement has been beneficial in regards to bringing to light the harassment that women deal with (overall, or within a particular industry? Unsure). So, let's celebrate that and realize that it's brought us to a new level of awareness, one that wasn't so publicized previously. And, here we are. What do we want to do with it? Continue with the onslaught, or become higher individuals who seek to create HEALTHY change withing ALL of us; men and women alike, because the issue is not just men, it's both of us.
Elicia Deva currently every man gets the blame for what a few men do. Its harmful to men and as we need each other by proxy women too. Postmodernism has run its course and is now almost a cancer.
This woman makes very valid points on responsibly on both sides.
Perhaps the question should be why are women angry. The answer is that we are not allowed true equality. The law pays lip service to this. Women doing equal jobs do not get equal pay and unfortunately, the fact that most women work has distorted the property market and means that we are now obliged to labour for less than our brethren. Men make the rules (law lords, judges, MPs, CEOs, managers), all mainly men, who weight the game in their own favour.
Banana's Minecraft and Hardware Yes, in THEIR own favour, not for other men, therefore it is not a Patriarchy, rather this is a CLASS problem.
Wage gap ? If you want to throw out wild generalisations why not throw out the "Spending gap"
However that money is made women have the lions share of how it's spent.
If you stand close to an elephant you only see it's skin.
Stand back a bit and you might see the elephant.
Not when I was married. I worked and made manage, it was my husband who was spend, spend, spend.
Although, you also have to see that women are generally expected to look good for their menfolk, so yeah we probably spend more on: lingerie; clothes; stockings; shoes; toiletries and cosmetic procedures, but believe me men sure can spend on: cars; electronic goods; subscriptions; booze; and that bit on the side ;)
Guess you have a point. Women in the upper echelons of society are not generally expected to work, just marry well and produce heirs. But that can not surely sum up the wage gap. Have personally had experience of working for a boss who only had 5 O- levels, at the time I had A-levels, a degree in biology and an HNC in mechanical & production engineering. This was in an Oxbridge research lab.
Banana's Minecraft and Hardware , recent data shows that women under 30 are better educated and actually making more than their counterparts, Beyond that age women in general tend to make different choices that effect their earning power. The obvious word is choice.
Results from school are not an actual value of your worth to a company.
Can I suggest you find your worth by asking firmly for a pay rise.